Geddes,+Eilidh

I debated for Dunwoody for four years in high school and now debate for UGA.

I’m fine with speed. If I can’t understand you, I will yell clear.

Ideal 2NRs in order: Case and a disad, Impact turning all advantages, Advantage counterplan and a disad, Process Counterplan, Topicality, Kritik

Theory: Conditionality is a reason to reject the team. Everything else is a reason to reject the argument, but I can be persuaded otherwise. Conditionality means that the neg can revert to the status quo at any point. Even if the aff wins that the counterplan is a bad idea, I will still vote neg if I think the status quo is a better option than the plan.

Cheap shots are not voters- if all you says is “severance perms bad, make the aff a moving target” and then move on and the aff drops it, I won’t vote on it. That’s just a reason why they don’t get their perm.

Kritiks: To be honest, I’m probably not the best judge to go for the kritik in front of. If you are going for the k, you should make sure to be very clear about what your kritik says (no buzzwords please). I will default to deciding the debate as a policymaker, but can be persuaded otherwise, but you need to explain what the role of the ballot is and how the alt functions.

Disads: I tend to view uniqueness through the lens of the link.

I’m not a big fan of the truth over technique argument- if something is mishandled by one side and this is exploited by the other side, I will vote on it, even if it is not technically a true argument.