Song,+Kanu

__Experience__: I usually judge VLD, but also occasionally judge Parli, Policy, PoFo, and Speech events. I competed primarily in LD in high school, Parli in college, and Mock Trial and Moot Court in law school.

__Preferences__: I have no rigid notions of what arguments should be or how they should function, but generally prefer substantive clash. I try to make all judging decisions based purely on the flow, but look to strict technicalities (e.g., card comparisons) only as a last resort.

Theory arguments are fair game. I enjoy strategic rounds and welcome creative and complex arguments. If you can argue it, I will consider it. That being said, I value common sense, and expect you to do the same.

I strongly dislike judge intervention and avoid it whenever possible. You should provide all necessary weighing at both the framework and impact levels, explain the decision calculus, and articulate clear voting issues.

__Speech__: Any speed is fine as long as it's clear. For speaker points I consider clarity and delivery first, presence and professionalism second, and attitude third. Courtesy is important to me; niceness is not. I appreciate wit, humor, and most other things that make the round interesting.

Please do not attempt to use speed, jargon, or anything else as a substitute for good arguments. It's not impressive, just annoying.

__Other__: I'm familiar with most topics in philosophy, mathematics, and the basic sciences, as well as the principles of conducting and interpreting academic or empirical research. Please do not carelessly use warrants that you neither understand nor cite correctly. I might notice, even if your opponent doesn't.

Please feel free to ask me questions before the round starts.