Papatriantafyllou,+Katrina

** Paradigm - Policy judge **
 * Katrina Papatriantafyllou, Mukwonago WI **

It’s acceptable that you'll have to speak faster than you normally would – I get it. Auctioneer-style, however, is unacceptable. If your reading the tags as fast as you read the cards, chances are I won’t realize you moved to a new piece of evidence. If you move to new stock issues, such as Harms or Advantages, make it clear. I will announce you’re speeding once by stating “clear.” If you continue to read too fast, I will stop flowing your speech.
 * __ Speed __**


 * __ Topicality __**
 * Topicality must be credible argument. Identify ** abuse. Explain arguments you can’t run, and what education you are losing. If the AFF has disclosed their case/plan prior to the round, negative can not claim that they can’t predict the affirmative or have nothing against it. Explain why topicality should be a voting issue in this round. “Topicality is a voter for fairness, jurisdiction and education”—explain what this means. Present a clear story of the abuse and explain why I should vote against that abuse. If you read topicality on the word “The” or “by,” I don’t listen. Do not run as a time suck.

Tell me in your Road Map that you will be reading DA’s, or I won’t flow them the way they should be. Clearly state the Link, Uniqueness, and Impact, or it may not have a lot of weight in the round since I won’t know what the evidence is saying. Also, clearly sign post your cards and your DA’s. Emphasize real impacts.
 * __ DisAdvantages __**

Brand new Off-Case Arguments are allowed in the 2NC by justifying why they are being provided. If you run these without justification, and the Affirmatives call abuse in the 1AR, I will agree with them.
 * __ New Arguments in the 2NC __**

You may split the neg block, but I do give some 1AR leniency.
 * __ Splitting the Neg Block __**

CP’s MUST be Non-Topical. Make sure I know it is clearly a counter-plan. If you get up and read evidence about your counter-plan, but fail to state it’s a counter-plan, I’ll flow it as regular evidence.
 * __ Counter-plans __**

Provide a scenario that shows how your Kritik deconstructs the AFF side, using strong evidence and arguments. Stating “not real world” or “there’s no way” is not a substitute for your lack of preparation.
 * __ Kritiks / Critics __**

Your rebuttal should write and sign the ballot for me.
 * __ Weigh the Round __**