Brusca,+Joshua

For Joshua Brusca I prefer debates that are done with a heavy emphasis on analytical arguments supported by moderate evidence. I give preference to arguments that are explained clearly and concisely in the debater’s own words. I am a particular fan of storytelling and scenario-painting; if you can describe to me a scenario in which your argument would occur I am much more likely to believe your argument.
 * __ Judging Philosophy __**

I do not enjoy excessively fast speed reading and will stop flowing if it is clear to me that a debater is no longer debating but simply reading as quickly as possible. Debaters who are able to speak at a reasonable pace yet still cover all the issues in the round by strategically picking the points that they will argue get 30’s in my opinion.

I am open to all types of argumentation, including inherency and significance attacks. The issues that I give the most attention to are Solvency, Inherency, Significance, Harms, & Topicality. If you do run a Kritik make sure it is the emphasis of the round taking precedence over all other issues, and that you take time to clearly explain it to me. I am open to Counter-Plans but expect to see very concise net benefits analysis. I am not a fan of plans that do not affirm the resolution, but will allow them so long as you make good reasoning for not needing to abide by the resolution.

I decide debates based primarily on the logic presented in the flow of each argument. Typically I will give the win to Neg if they are winning convincingly in any of the following areas: Topicality, Inherency, or Solvency. I will only vote on K and CP’s if there is a clear and substantial net benefit to the alternative. To win a harms or significance debate I must see proper impact calculus. Aff does not need to make offensive arguments to win the round, although it doesn’t hurt, so long as they soundly refute any and all attacks made by the Neg. I do give weight to things in round that I perceive as being abusive or unethical if the issue is raised by the other team. These will at least cost you speaker points, and possibly the round.