Adams,+Shane


 * **Topicality:** I don't vote for topicality often, not because I dislike the argument, but because I think it's run very poorly too often. If you want to win a round on topicality, make sure that you aren't speeding through your topicality shells, that there's little (if anything) else you're going for at the end of the round, and that you are spending the time to link all of your standards back to education (it's the only voter that will matter to me).
 * **Disads/Counterplans:** I won't vote you down for having generic link/internal link scenarios and unrealistic nuclear apocalypse impacts, but I won't necessarily like you for it either. Other than that, smart DA/CP strategies make for rounds I enjoy.
 * **Critiques/Critical Affs:** I ran a one-off critique and critical aff every year of my policy debate career, so I'm comfortable with whatever you want to run. I give less leeway to most critique alternatives compared to counterplans when it comes to multiple worlds theory debates, so keep that in mind.
 * **Framework/Theory:** See Topicality. Specificity and in-depth commitment to the argument will make me more likely to vote for a framework interpretation and like that I'm doing so.
 * **Generic Neg Strategy:** Make every argument in your 1NC one that you can go for at the end of the round, and collapse your strategy as the round progresses. There's little I dislike watching more than a round where the Neg has 7 flows until the 2NR because they think that just reading faster can win them the round.
 * **Speed:** Go for it. But be clear.
 * **Tag-team CX:** Go for it. But one partner shouldn't dominate every CX.
 * **Other stuff:** I won't call for evidence unless the text of the evidence is disputed. I encourage you to ask me questions before and after the round about whatever you want to know.

The most important thing in any given round is your education, so above-all I want everyone to have fun, run what you like to run, and respect your fellow debaters.