Volant,David

I am a former debater. The most important thing to me in the round is that debaters know how arguments interact before they make them. If you are unsure of how the argument functions and then you still make the argument, it's only going to make the round messy and probably won't benefit you. Link arguments with impacts to standards or at least explain how they function in the debate round. Floating arguments aren't useful because they won't make sense in terms of the round and, as a result, I won't vote on them.

Speed is fine, however, if you are spreading through a series of short analytic arguments, slow down __significantly__. Also slow down for tag-lines.

Theory--Run it in the shell form.

Plans--Run them in Plan format and be clear that you are using plan focus, etc.

K's--Clearly explain how they function in the debate round and go slower if it is super-dense philosophy.

CP's, DA's--I prefer them run in their specific formats.

I try to flow all the arguments and will vote off pretty much any argument. My preference is to vote on good arguments, whatever that may mean.