Rossiter,+Jackie

I am Jackie Rossiter. I debated for Palo Alto High School for four years on both the local and national circuit. I am currently in my first year at Barnard College.

The three big things I look for in rounds are clear warrants, weighing, and voting issues. I prefer to give debaters as much control over the round as possible so it is best for you and me if you set up a decision calculus for me. Extend things you want me to vote on, tell me how the arguments interact in the round, and weigh your voting issues. In terms of arguments I will vote on anything as long as it is well warranted and topical. Have fun and feel free to experiment within these parameters.

Speed: I am ok with speed but not great. Frankly, I have trouble reading my flows when a debater is going at top speed. In order to have a more fairly adjudicated round keep in mind that I am more likely to be able to follow the debate at a slower pace.

Theory: I believe that theory has a place in debate and I will vote on it, but please use it primarily in cases of actual in round abuse as a check. Make sure, if you are running theory, that you warrant it as you would any other argument, and that you include clear voters.

Critical arguments, alternative cases structures, a priori ect…: I enjoy these types of arguments. Feel free to run these or any other new type of argument. Just make sure that whatever you run is well warranted. I encourage debaters to try new things and am interested in hearing new types of debate.
 * For a priori/pre-standards/prima facie especially make sure that these are clearly warranted and have clear reasons for why they are true.

Speaker Points: I will award speaker points based on how well you engage directly your opponents arguments/the resolution and how clearly you speak. I do not tolerate in round rudeness. If you are rude to your opponent it will negatively impact your speaker points.