Alexis,+Maya

I’m currently in college out of state but during high school I competed in CA all four years of high school (UoP, James Logan, States, etc.). I was mostly LD, but also did OO and impromptu.
 * My background: **

**General**:
 * Try to refrain from cutting off your opponent. Good lord, I always found this so incredibly rude while I was debating, ESPECIALLY if you’re the one asking them questions. Repeatedly cutting off your opponent will absolutely result in docked speaks.
 * That being said, don’t waste your opponent’s time during CX. If you just keeping going on and on and it’s all BS, that comes out of your speaks. CX is about conciseness.
 * STAY WITHIN YOUR TIME LIMIT. Squeezing in three more words is fine, but trying to make a whole new point after your timer as gone off is not. Don’t even try it; I’ll stop listening and dock speaks as you go.
 * Please don't use a phone timer.
 * I do flow, I do extend and drop arguments appropriately.
 * I hate the phrase “you must vote..”. It’s annoying and a little arrogant.
 * I'll evaluate impact on magnitude times probability.
 * I don’t have a problem with asking for evidence during prep. But, you have two choices. We can start prep when the evidence comes over (but you may not write or look over the flow during this time) or you can start prep and ask for evidence while the timer goes. If your opponent can’t produce the evidence within a reasonable amount of time, that’s on them.


 * Things that will help win you the ballot: **
 * __GOOD LOGIC__. I grew up LD, so logical arguments are very persuasive to me. Evidence is good to back that up, but sound logic (especially in refutations) is great. If both your logic makes sense to me, I’ll default to evidence.
 * Not forgetting about Value debate. It’s okay to concede to your opponent's value and show how you better uphold it (this is actually a good strategy), but don’t just leave it out.
 * Referencing evidence correctly. If in your 2AR you’re speeding through your speech and you say that “Barnett 6” wins you the contention, and I don’t remember what “Barnett 6” said, that's a problem. I try my best to keep track of all presented evidence, but give me a quick tagline to refresh my memory.
 * Cross-applying correctly. Don’t expect me to do it for you. You don’t need to over explain it; something like “Cross apply my C1 to their C3” will suffice if you’re running out of time.


 * Evidence: **
 * If you cut a card, it’s really best to have the original document saved on your computer to be pulled up (if you have a computer, of course) if your opponent asks. Especially if it's a study.
 * Evidence barreling your opponent is a cheap way to win. Twenty-five country examples is great, but your opponent is more than allowed to refute generally or outweigh the impacts.


 * V/VC: **
 * I love all things philosophy so don’t be afraid to bring up abstract values or VC’s.
 * I like to see all contentions match your V/VC in some way, though it’s not my first priority
 * That is, if you’re debating someone whose C2 doesn’t match their V/VC, and this is your only refutation to it, you’ll lose the point.

**Spreading**:
 * I can understand spreading, though I’m more impressed with people who can make good arguments speaking at regular speed, but ultimately it’s up to your opponent. If they are not comfortable with spreading, don’t do it. Seriously. All that you’re telling me when you do that is that you would rather confuse your opponent than have a good debate.
 * If you plan to spread, you better have an extra paper case for your opponent. Don’t expect them to have a USB or a computer.
 * I will yell “clear” two times. After that, I’ll stop listening.


 * YOU WILL LOSE SPEAKS IF YOU: **
 * Are rude to your opponent. Verbally or nonverbally. Call me petty but I think this shows really poor character. If you roll your eyes during an opponent's argument, make faces, are rude during CX, call an argument “stupid”, I assure you your speaks will reflect it.
 * Bring up a dropped argument
 * Call an argument dropped when it wasn’t
 * Spread and I have to call “clear” more than 2 times.

//Love, love, love,// on two conditions:
 * Counter plans: **
 * 1) You can find some examples (even just one example) of where it’s worked and worked well.
 * 2) You can weigh your world against the Aff’s.

I grew up traditional debating, but I’m comfortable with theory debate. Not a huge fan of it, but both are fine. If you’re traditional and not comfortable with it, the most tragic things I see are debaters trying to debate theory when they’re not sure how — so don’t. **I won’t dock you for not debating theory, at any level of the competition.** In fact, I have tons of respect for anyone who gets to higher levels of tournaments on traditional debate. That being said, if you’re theory, debate theory. BUT: a) If you see your opponent is struggling to understand your terms/arguments, I expect you to explain it to them well and politely. Winning an argument because you out-vocabularied your opponent doesn’t count as winning in my book, and b) it better be good, valid theory. **I HATE disclosure theory. Hate it.**
 * Theory: **

Not a fan. If it’s all you have, okay. If not, try something else. Please.
 * K’s: **