Troxclair,+Beau

Beau Troxclair Liberty University T/Theory – Maybe it is the 2N in me, but I definitely have a high threshold for theoretical violations. I find it much easier to vote aff on conditionality than anything else. Even if you have a super sweet theory violation to the crazy counterplan that the neg is running, its only a reason to reject the team if you win that conditionality is bad. That said, I can be persuaded to vote on wankey theory violations if you can prove that I should for some reason or another, but be warned, the words “reject the arg not the team” may be enough for me to disregard your argument if its not that smart. T almost always comes before theory, and although I can be persuaded not to vote on it, and that your project is more important, that is going to be an uphill battle. I hate reverse voting issues. Don’t do it.

CP/DA – The CP DA debates are the ones I am most comfortable with. Like I said above, your cheating counterplan may not be a reason to reject you on face, but the probability of me throwing out your counterplan rises in direct proportion to how much it cheats, as does the risk I actually do reject you. Case Debate is something everyone should do. I’m not gonna lie, I have only judged about 20 rounds on this topic, so I’m not super familiar with all the intricacies of the affs and DAs typically read (except politics of course), I’m no lay judge, but it might behoove you to hash some of the more intricate details and distinctions out in cross ex and definitely in your speech.

Ks – I will listen to your K and probably understand most of it. Honestly I don’t go very deep in the more obscure K’s. But if you critique realism or security or any sort of Rhetoric, I’ll be right with you. Please don’t make me listen to first priority/give the land back, or your psychoanalytic deleuze and guattari/lacanian babble.