Dyer,+Troy

Hello, my name is Troy Dyer, I debated policy for a few years in high school and I have just recently returned to help judge in the state of Ohio. I attempt to be as tab as possible, and as such I value impact calc A LOT when making decisions.

T: I am willing to vote on T, but only if there is proven in round abuse. Too often I see T violations thrown out as time sucks, and this is a particular pet peeve of mine. If you choose to run T, please make sure to keep the flow clean and organized, and spend a respectable amount of time on the abuse story.

Theory: I feel the same way about theory as I do about T. I will vote on it, but I require an abuse story. As with T, please keep flows clean, nothing is more painful than an unorganized theory debate (as I'm sure you already know)

DA's and CP's: I have no problems with either of these.

K's: I am fine with K's as long as the people running them understand the Kritik and explains it in very good detail. One of my pet peeves is watching a K round in which nobody understands what the K is arguing for/against. With that being said, K's have great potential for an interesting round, so if you understand your argument and you feel comfortable explaining it in detail then feel free to run it.

Speed: I'm fine with speed, but please be clear (especially on tags, authors, and standards).

Conditional Negative Arguments: Usually I don't have a problem with condo as long as it isn't too abusive. I do think that running multiple conditional advocacies is pushing your luck. Really though it will come down to the theory debate and if I feel that there was in round abuse.

Number of Arguments: I usually prefer fewer, more elaborated arguments because I feel that it leads to a more in depth (and thus more interesting/educational) debate. I'm not too picky though, so all I'll ask is to be reasonable.

General Notes: Basically if you know your arguments and give me good impact calc I will be very happy. In the final rebuttals I expect you to tell me where I should vote and why I should vote there. Like I said above, I try really hard to be a tab judge, so I will vote on almost anything as long as it makes logical sense and is debated well (I hold theory and T to a higher threshold, see above notes). Usually I like to give a fairly sizable critique at the end of the round, however I'm not sure if that'll be allowed because of NFL rules. If it isn't, I will do my best to give you a general idea after the round ends as to what I felt the key issues were, and I will write detailed notes so that you understand why I voted the way I did. Finally remember that debate supposed to be fun, so HAVE FUN, but be respectful.

If you have any questions about my philosophy, or see a problem with the wiki please let me know before the round starts, I will be more than happy to clarify in the interest of having the best round possible.