Forester,+JesseForester,+Jesse

I debated 1999-2003 for Highland Park in Dallas, TX. I was involved with one institute while an undergrad at Michigan and judged at their tournament while I was a student there. I am now in law school at SMU and judge at Dallas-area tournaments on the weekends.

I would like you to make the significant issues in the round clear in the 2NR and 2AR. Tell me why you should win. I don't like to do work for you after the round. However, I will read evidence after rounds when necessary - though you should make sure to re-cite those authors in the 2NR and 2AR.

I have no problem voting for theory, but would suggest you devote a significant amount of time to these issues in the rebuttals if you want them to be goods options.

I also have no problem voting for critiques, but I won't vote for them just because they sound cool. I think they are a strategic tool, but often come from authors that should be mocked.

For speaker points, I encourage you to slow down for tags, theoretical arguments, and analytics. Otherwise, just be clear.

If you have questions before the round, ask specific questions and I'll answer.