Thompson,+Wyatt

I can hang. I like a good framework debate best. I did debate in Texas in HS and have been judging the national circuit for a couple years. I'm a tabula rasa of course (name that philosopher). But having preferences is unavoidable (name THAT philosopher). Things I like:
 * Insightful arguments
 * Crystalization and Big Picture [Like for sure do this. If you understand your argument, you can say it in less than 3 sentences at the end and it'll help me connect my flow]
 * Framework
 * Respect
 * Creative argumentation

Things I do not like:
 * An assumption that I've already heard your T-Shell
 * Calling your opponent by their first name---it weirds me out. I don't know you guys.
 * Disclosure Theory---bleh. I'll vote if you make me. But I won't be stoked about it.
 * Spreading the content of your evidence to the point of incoherence.
 * Doing work for you
 * Oh! Don't read a tagline and then start A,B,C,D. Say interp, violation, etc. The assumed format is annoying and being a Tabula Rasa, if I don't understand it, I won't pick the pieces up for you.

I'm a good judge. Every person I've ever voted for really deserved it.