Stulken,+Carina

I have been coaching for Green River, Wyoming for nine years and I compete in Policy Debate in high school and college.

In terms of policy debate I will listen to any argument you make. If you can win solvency you can usually win my ballot and I hate generic Disads, but if they are dropped or uncovered it isn't outside the realm of possibility that I will vote on them. I have voted on kritiks, but they need to be set up well and defended well-you can win my ballot on the framework or the kritik proper, or both if its set up correctly and run correctly; I also believe you need to have an alternate that is more than reject the Aff. I will listen to topicality, but unless the case is truly untopical its hard to win my vote on it. Procedurals are fine as well. Speed is not an issue as long as you have clarity. Reading so fast that nobody in the room is able to flow is ridiculous and will totally tick me off. Having said that, it is pretty difficult to flow me out of a round.

In terms of PF debate-I expected clash on the topic. If each side presents their points and there is no clash I wind up having to do the work for you and I dislike having to do the work for you. Each point should be backed with evidence as well as analysis-this is a debate and a purely analytical debate is annoying. Give me statistics and facts, the more the better. And while PF doesn't allow for a policy position I don't see the harm in exploring "alternatives"-don't give me a plan text though-its not policy debate.