Hall,+Andrew

-Debated for four years at Highland Park Senior High -Sophomore at the University of Minnesota, where I am debating, and assistant coach at Patrick Henry High School.
 * Experience: **

I think that debate is fundamentally a game, and to that end I think that you can do anything that you can justify, excluding speaker points, speech times, and the fact that someone has to lose. I debated a variety of Kritiks and policy strategies, so I feel pretty comfortable evaluating most types of arguments, including K affs. I also believe that even highly competitive debates can be conducted pleasantly, at least in between the speeches. My tolerance for actually lowering speaker points significantly for rude behavior is pretty high, but being nice could be the difference between a 27.5 and a 28. Overall, to get my ballot: be polite, make smart strategic choices, being funny never hurts, and always act like an adult.
 * General:**

I tend to default to competing interpretations in theory debates – other than that I'm pretty open to what evolves on the flow. However, I also find "reject the argument not the team" persuasive on most smaller theoretical objections unless the offense was particularly egregious.
 * Theory: **

I haven't ended up judging many T debates, but I went for it often enough that I probably default to competing interpretations, but can be persuaded to change my mind.
 * T: **