Slider,+Alex

**History **: I debated both on the state and national level for policy debate. During my time debating in high school I was both the 2A and the 2N. My senior year I ran a critical affirmative and a frequent negative strategy was “1 off”. **Overview **: I will only vote on arguments. An argument is a 1. Claim- This is the sentence that is the argument or something you think is true. 2. Warrant- This is an explanation that gives credit to the claim. 3. Impact- This is where you explain to me as the judge why this argument is important in the debate. Allot of teams tend to do really well on the claim and warrant but lack on the impact part. The more impact work you do for your argument the easier it will be for me as a judge to vote on it. That being said I do believe that **a dropped argument is a true argument** so if they drop an argument you still have to have the three parts of an argument for me to vote on it but you definitely don’t have to spend as much time on it.  When it comes to speed I can keep up but clarity is something allot of debaters sacrifice without realizing it. If I can’t understand an argument then I won’t flow it. If later in the debate you choose to extend an argument I couldn’t hear then I will act as if it is the first time I heard the argument. Also word the wise; I have a bad ear so although I debated and listened to spreading for a pretty long time I have trouble hearing sometimes so going as fast as you can may not be the best idea. You will have a hard time getting me to vote on cheap shot arguments unless they are dropped. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Topicality **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">: I default to competing interpretations. If you are going to K topicality I am fine with that but you must prove that excluding the aff is worse than excluding negative ground. I think that switch side debate is good. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">DAs: **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">For me it is most about the impact calculus. I would like to see a comparison to the aff. Tell me to either look at the uniqueness or the link first. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Theory **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">: I have a hard time voting on theory arguments unless I see in round abuse. Nothing annoys me more than when a team destroys the ground under their feet then complains that the other team hasn’t given them enough room to run. Don’t spread theory blocks. I try to flow all the sub-points but that is hard when you are spreading it like it’s a card. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Counterplans **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">: I love PIC’s. I also think that the solvency for the counterplan has to be parallel quality to that of the aff. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Criticisms **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">: I love them.. I ran them for most of my senior year. I am probably more qualified to judge a K debate compared to a policy debate. Most teams would be more successful when reading a K f they didn’t read the ALT. Another thing teams tend to lack is how the alternative solves the impact. It’s also nice to see comparative aff work. You don’t necessarily need cards for this but rather empirically ties to the aff. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Framework **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">: There is a huge difference between telling me how to evaluate impacts and telling me to not evaluate them.