Mira,+Oscar


 * Experience: ** High School debater for two years in PF and LD. 10th in state for LD in California. While more knowledgeable in LD than any other form of debate, I am experienced in PF but relatively inexperienced with CX. No Circuit experience.


 * Generally Applicable Preferences: **A big impact on my decision for a round comes from voter issues. Make these clear and concise. I prefer quality over quantity and want all claims to be warranted and to have an impact. I will not argue for you, so unless argued, it will not be relevant in my decision. That being said, I am a flow judge and I follow each argument. Dropping an argument does not necessarily mean a loss, but the impact of the argument is measured accordingly. I prefer speakers to be clear and to signpost each argument. While I am ok with speed, you should not sacrifice clarity and quality for it. Because of my LD background, I enjoy cases that inject philosophy into the debate. I would rather not have the debate be a battle of numbers where one mathematically comes out victorious.


 * LD Specific: ** The biggest weight in LD for my decision is the V & VC debate. More specifically, the VC is most important to me. All arguments should link towards the VC because it is the foundation for the value. The arguments should be logical with warranted impacts. The winner is the debater that better upholds their value.


 * PF Specific: ** Cases should use scholarly evidence much like in CX and LD. As previously stated, I vote heavily based on voter issues. In terms of priority, Voter Issues, Flow, Cross-X.


 * CX Specific: ** Since this is my most inexperienced format, proper signposting and clarity go a long way.

Ask me if you have any questions.