Day,+Nathan

__**BACKGROUND:**__

I'm an alumni of Coronado High School in Henderson, Nevada. I've participated in forensics since the 2008-2009 season, and have participated in all four debates, with an increased focus on Lincoln Douglas and Public Forum over Policy and Congress. I am an active assistant coach for Coronado, and can be reached at ndayonline@gmail.com

__**CONSTRAINTS:**__

Coronado High School (and recent alumni)

__**GENERAL OVERVIEW:**__

As someone who spent the majority of their time in Public Forum, I've grown accustomed to the steady pace and clear diction of PF; while I am capable of understanding speed, I prefer arguments made that are slow with elegance over speedy deliver of cards, and firmly believe that repeated citation of an author does not an argument make. Given my recent experiences with people claiming they can spread on the national circuit (and being laughably bad at it), I've decided that it's best to err on the side of caution and simply say no spreading.

Fewer arguments explained thoroughly are preferential over a multitude of shallow attacks that are just snippets of evidence with little debate connection. I weigh rounds on impact calculus unless otherwise directed to do so explicitly by debaters- if you wish for me to use another weighing mechanism, I expect to be told why your mechanism is preferential over impact calc and your opponent's. There's nothing I really have trouble following; I'm familiar with k's and the semantics of debate. I have no problem with unorthodox strategies or progressive argumentation.