Mylott,+Thomas

Four Years High School CX at Highland Park High School (Dallas) (2008-2012)
 * Background:**

Never judged or debated this before, in case I'm on the LD pref sheet.
 * LD: **

I'll evaluate in whatever framework I'm told to in the round, but otherwise I'll default to policy maker, evaluating the benefits and impacts of passing the affirmative plan as a policy actor of some form. I value cumulative, top level analysis very highly, especially in the later speeches some degree of explicit impact calculus or debate framing, telling me explicitly how I should vote and why, will go a long way to earning my ballot. Obviously line-by-line matters too, but you need to connect the dots and bring it all together for me, the less work you make me have to do to justify voting for you, the better.
 * CX:**

K's are fine, other than the usual caveats of "explain clearly and show you know what you're talking about." Again though, I'll default to evaluating these kinds of arguments in a cost-benefit analysis way unless I'm given a more explicit framework to vote on that is adequately laid out. Try to be somewhat consistent with your advocacy on the negative, whether or not I'm voting for the status quo or as some type of ringing criticism of communism/capitalism/security.

I haven't judged on this topic before, so perhaps be a little wary on issues of topicality, as I won't know what affs have consistently been ruled as topical or not. I see topicality primarily as a means of preventing abuse and guaranteeing link ground, so if you want me to end up voting on topicality this is what you should focus on proving.

I would like to lie and say I'm "totally okay with theory" but that's not the case. I usually find theory debates to be too-technical and hard to follow. If for whatever reason a round comes down to an argument on theory, I will do my best to follow, but be warned that I'll probably end up pulling for whoever provides the best holistic "story" or analysis of why they win the theory debate, even if they're lagging a bit on the line by line. This goes for framework arguments as well, if you want me on your side remember to do at least some summarizing work at the top or bottom of the flow to convince me why you're winning.

Any other questions feel free to ask me prior to the round!