Maier,+Zack

I debated for four years at Parkway Central high school and am now at Northwestern. Feel free to run whatever you feel most comfortable with in front of me. In terms of strategy, I've debated at both poles- from strictly CP/DA to one off Ks- and everywhere in between. If what you do in the debate contradicts with the following in every possible way, that doesn't mean I won't vote for you. Chances are I hate the other team just as much.

Topicality: Give me an interpretation and an impact - I think of T as a disadvantage. Aff needs to either give a counter interp or a reason that they meet. I love a great standards debate. Also, I think a T can be outweighed by good, substantive arguments against the interpretation (t = genocidal biopwr), but you're going to have to do it well.

Framework: I have always believed that you can do what you can justify. That being said, you better be able to justify it. I think that affs who don't know how to handle Ks will default to dumping a bunch of random stuff on framework. Affs HAVE to impact their framework arguments. If a K links, I'm probably not going to buy a 'wrong forum' argument. For me, you can make these arguments more effectively on the alternative debate. Most framework debates are not effective and really suck.

Theory: See topicality. I'm fine with all things that may be deemed "theoretically objectionable" and I'm also willing to listen to the theory arguments that ensue. Usually I value them as a reason that the argument should not be considered rather than a reason why the team running it should lose, but there are definitely times in which I would consider voting on theory arguments. I will take an easy way out if the opportunity is given, but you have to give me serious warrants.

CP/DA: Always fine. If the CP can solve the entirety of the aff, I'm usually persuaded by some hint of a link to the net benefit. That being said, I'm sure I could be persuaded otherwise. A lot of DAs are false.

K: Do your thing, but don't be stupid. Just because I used to run Ks doesn't mean I'm going to sign the ballot the second I hear the 1NC. For me, the K debate should come down to the alt. The aff usually wins if the beat the alt and loses if they don't. That being said, I need good link and impact analysis. I don't think realism is a very effective argument, and it rarely applies. Know what it is before running it.

Performance: Do your thing, but don't be stupid. I'm probably not going to be a part of your project.

Speed: I will be able to keep up with you if you're clear. I'll tell you if you aren't.

Humor: If you're not funny, its okay, but if you make jokes, you can benefit your speaker points. Avoid racism and sexism. I don't find your bigotry amusing. Save it for the Klan meeting.