Wolfe,+Phoebe

Background: I was an LD debater for four years at Newburgh Free Academy and competed pretty much entirely on the local circuit. Graduated in 2011.

Conflicts: NFA

Speed: I flow fairly well, so I don’t mind spreading, but make sure you slow down for names, taglines, etc. and PLEASE be clear. I’ll say clear, but if you continue speaking unclearly/too fast, I just won't flow your arguments. Also, if you’re running some complex, philosophical argument, it would be a good idea to speak more slowly if you want me to understand it.

I’ll vote on anything so long as it's warranted, weighed & impacted.

CX: Treat CX as if it were another speech. I pay attention to it and I will dock speaks if you’re rude/give speaks if you’re especially impressive. I don’t mind if you ask questions during prep time.

Ks: Please don't run a K if you don't plan on arguing it well. I definitely enjoy hearing arguments that stray form the stock arguments I hear every round, but Ks tend to run a pretty high risk of being run as a way of just confusing the other debater. If you don't understand your own arguments, misconstrue authors, make it obvious that you're just running it for strategic purposes, etc., I'm much less likely to vote on it. I'm also NOT well-read on critical literature, so don't expect me to have any previous knowledge of the arguments you're running. I have no problem telling you that I didn't understand an argument; it's your job to explain it to me clearly. Also, if your K is actually true, I'll probably like it a lot more.

Theory: I don’t particularly like theory. It’s definitely needed to check abuse, but it’s your job to prove to me that the abuse actually exists. I'm much more disposed to look to substance if I think that the theory debate gets very muddled, as it often does.