Tinker,+Nicholas

Policy Judge I have a Bachelor of Liberal Arts degree and a Master of Social Work degree. My paradigm is tabula rasa and communication. It is fine to go fast through the text of the card, but slow down on taglines, so I can flow the points. It helps my flow if you number your evidnece. I like road maps, sign posts and voters. The constructive speeches for the Aff should build the case and answer Neg arguments. I prefer realistic, logical impact scenarios over the more far fetched and nucler war impacts, however, I do understand if you have to make them. I'm not likely to vote on T if they are reasonably topical. I'll vote on K, but I like it explained clearly. As for counter plans, if they are well-supported, I will vote on them. Disadvantages need to be weighed against the case. Clash is good, respectful clash is better. Cross is time to clarify your opponents points, expose weaknesses and set traps for exploitation in subsequent speeches. I enjoy judging, pay attention to all arguements and judge each debate by what is going on in the room.