Hughes,+Jaret

Jaret Hughes Email: jaret.hughes13@gmail.com

I debated four (4) years at Perry High School in Ohio and competed on the state circuit there. I was a policy debater (2n/1a) all of those years. I have about 2 Glenbrooks and 1 NSDA Nats worth of experience on the National Circuit, but I went to camp while I was competing multiple times so I think I have a fairly decent grasp of Nat Circuit debate.

I have a short version (for quick reference before rounds) and a thorough version. 0

Short: Do whatever you want in the round, I vote off my flow. I'll shout clear a few times if I can't understand you but if you don't adapt I'll stop flowing. I'll vote on anything as long as it is justified but I default to voting for the best policy option in the round. I accept all K args but assume I have no background knowledge. T and theory are great debates if run well but if run poorly your speaks will reflect my displeasure. I'm open to non-traditional debate styles just tell me how I and the ballot fit into the round.

Thorough: I'll divide this version into the different sections of debate so that it says a little organized.

Before the 1AC I default to a policymaker paradigm. I default think that the ballot should go to the better policy option presented by the two teams. If, at any point of the debate, a debater challenges that default and asks me to use a different paradigm, no matter what it is, I will shift my paradigm to that one. It is then up to the debaters to clash if the other team wants to change my paradigm/the role of the ballot. Make sure that you keep these debates just as clear as any other type of debate though and be explicit about them and what you want from me.