Schaeffer,+Rylan

I competed for four years for Mountain View High School. However, I only did circuit LD for two of those years.

While judging on the circuit, I try to be as tab as possible. However, I do have minimal requirements if you want my ballot:
 * 1) I will only vote for actual arguments. That means a claim, a warrant and an impact. If you can't explain in-round why your claim is true or why your claim matters, I will not bring the argument into my decision calculus.
 * 2) I will only vote for offensive arguments. I believe the affirmative has the burden to prove the resolution true and the negative has the burden to prove the resolution false, and to do so requires offense. If neither debater extends offense, I will decide the round by flipping a coin.
 * 3) I will only vote for arguments that are extended in a form intellectually consistent with their original formation. I'm fine with new cross applications, but I strongly frown on twisting arguments to draw new implications, especially in later speeches.

To minimize judging interference, it behooves you to provide a standard for me to decide the round. That standard does not necessarily have to be formatted in the traditional value/value criterion structure. I would also recommend clearly structuring your cases, DAs, Ks, etc. The clearer you can make your argument, your authors and your evidence, the easier it will be for me to understand the argument. In general, I enjoy non-standard arguments (Ks, narratives, performance, discursive, a prioris, etc.), but only when argued well. I am fine with speed, but I will not interfere if you are unclear. Do not assume that speaking quickly will increase your odds of winning the round; I prefer quality over quantity.

Expect an oral RFD after the round. Because tournaments usually run late, I usually keep my comments to a minimum. If you need clarification or additional feedback, feel free to approach me at a later time.