Bae,+Austin

Experience: 3 years at Oakton High School

__**TL;DR**__ - I vote on the flow so you better not drop something significant - Run your best arguments but don't assume I have prior knowledge of them - Case debate is probably important, whether it is straight-up or performance aff - I'm not very good at hiding my facial expression, so you'll know what I'm thinking most of the time

__**General**__ I have pretty much ran only traditional policy affirmatives during my 3 years of debate, ranging from hardcore Heg to "soft-right" environment impacts. (But if you're thinking of striking me off automatically because you're a K team, read the heading  Below) I default to utilitarianism unless you tell me otherwise. Impact framing should be a bulk of your speech in the 2AR or 2NR if you decide to defend a K impact vs policy framework. If you are defending a policy impact vs a Kritik, then you have to also defend the probability of your impacts. Just saying "policy impacts good, Kritiks are bad" will not make me pull the trigger on your impact.

I also never vote solely on defense or presumption, 1% chance of impacts happening is enough for me to vote. I default to an offense/defense paradigm.

I'm an engineering major, and I love it when science is discussed in debate. I love warming and biodiversity impacts, so it would be a little advantageous for you to run them in front of me. I don't usually have strong bias in arguments when coming into a round, but I will probably not buy that warming isn't real or evolution fake etc etc etc. Also you probably don't want to BS things in that area, because I will know about it and I will dock speaks.

Speed is fine, but slow down on taglines and especially STANDARDS on theory.

__**DA**__ You can never go wrong with a solid case + DA debate. I have a special place for Politics in my heart, and I would love to see more of these in rounds. Make sure you don't run DAs with Ks that contradict each other (Security/Neolib) because I will be happy to vote on Perf Con if executed properly. Oh, and by the 2NR I expect a more solid link story rather specific to the aff, because that's really the heart of any offcase arguments that many teams often overlook. If I hear "they link bc they're surveillance" in the 2NR you're probably not doing a good enough job.

__**CP**__ Multiple CPs are okay unless they contradict. Make sure you flush out the net benefit and answer all perm arguments. It's often a good strategy to kick the alternative and just go for the NB as a DA. When answering a CP, try to always run at least one theory argument. Also make sure you ask whether the CP acts as a PIK or not. PIKs are probably a bad thing unless you drop em.

__**T/Theory**__ I really love T debates, and it used to be my go-to neg strat when facing a completely unfamiliar aff. I default Reasonability, but don't let that preventing you from running T if necessary. I will gladly vote on FX or Extra-T if your spin on it is flushed out really well. I also flow every standards you make, so make sure to slow down on those or I might not catch them. I won many rounds on obnoxious theory like Vague Alts or Utopian Fiat, so I will be very pleased if you manage to explain them well.

If you drop Theory or T, you will probably lose. If they manage to just extend one piece of offense that has a terminal impact, then you will lose. (Unless they dropped a theory too and its a complete shit-show) Please Please PLEASE don't make me vote on stupid shit like A-spec...

__**Kritiks**__ During my senior year my neg strat was 1 off K or T+K. So I know the fundamentals of Kritiks and I know what you need to do in order to win. I'm familiar with the generics like Cap, Security, along with other Ks that I've ran. I'll vote on any K as long as you can explain (1) what the alternative actually does (2) defend your framework and impact framing. I will know when you are not debating and just reading blocks. Please explain your Kritik even if you think I know it. Slow down on overviews. If you are answering Ks, make sure you go hard on framework and answer all K tricks. If you are running a big stick aff, impact turns along with alt fails are going to be very effective as well.

__**Speaks**__ I usually give high speaks unless you really pissed me off by saying something offensive. I think aggressive speeches/Cross-exes are good and strategic, but you know where the line stands between that and just plain rude.