Wooten,+Amy

debate exp: 4 years in high school 3 years at CSUF

Topicality: You're either all in or out for me. I don't like T as a time sucker and there needs to be flagrant examples of abuse in the round for me to vote for it. It comes down to competing interpretations and ground abuse. I am completely open to Kritikal affs and interpretations of the resolution.

Theory: Many of my views on Theory are the same as topicality. I feel the community needs to have space for non traditional debate so I'm a tough sell. If you make a good case about in round abuse and try to be somewhat inclusive of other forms of debate I might be persuaded.

Dis Ads: Biggest issue for me with disads is the probability or tipping point to your overall impacts. I need evidence and a strong link scenario throughout the debate that your catastrophic impact scenario will likely happen if the aff plan is passed.

Kritik: The K was my bread and butter throughout college. The most important thing for me is a strong viable alternative that is hopefully able to solve the root cause of the affirmative harms. A good link story is important as well. I like to see a combination of evidence analysis and analyticals in the last couple of speeches.

CounterPlans: I love counter plans. Debate usually comes down to viable net benefits and the permutation.