Armstrong,+Cody

Debated at Medina Valley high school for four years and now debate at University of North Texas .

If I had to pick a preference on a round, I'd prefer to hear a more policy oriented round, I'm a tab judge that can be persuaded to vote on most anything.

Guide Lines-

T - reasonability can be persuasive, i default to competing interpretations, impact your standards, tell me why they matter.

Kritiks - I don't tend to run, but I do answer them quite often. please stay away from k jargon, have a clear impact, and alt. framing the debate is important, why should 'x' come first. Note: If you are running something of a kritikal nature, assume you need to explain it a bit more in depth than you would normally as I may not be well versed with the literature you are talking about.

CP/disads - I enjoy them, have a clear net benefit, they should be competitive with the aff, i tend to default neg on the condo debate

Theory- Sure, go for it, I'm not going to say it's a round winner every time, but I have voted and won/lost on theory before. Don't spread through a theory block and expect me to get it all down, impact your standards, tell me why they matter.

Speed- CLARITY IS VERY IMPORTANT! Go ESPECIALLY slow on tags and cites, if I misflow something it's going to impact you a lot more than me in the debate. Also, give some type of notification when you are moving to a different argument.

Evidence- I will read particular evidence after the round if the quality is questioned or if during comparison/calculus in the last rebuttal the warrants are questioned. If you think you have a good card, explain why it is good and relevant to the particular debate and I shouldn't have to read it after the round. Doing this type of in-depth analysis is a good way to get better speaker points.(so is being funny)

Prep time- prep time goes until the file is saved and flash drive is out of the computer.