Flake,+Hannah


 * Speed:** Your job as a debater is to make sure you are communicating. I’m fine with some pace; however, spreading is not clear to me. I will not attempt to say “clear”; you should be aware of how you sound and how well someone can follow what you say.

Do keep this in mind: I subtract speaks, even from an excellent debater, for rudeness in a round. Respect your opponents. Low-point wins are definitely obtainable with me.
 * Speaker points:** I try to be very tournament specific. Therefore, the best communicators at Harvard will earn 30s, and so will the best communicators out of the group present at a local tournament. I do not go below 27 save for egregious performances.

Accordingly, a Kritical debater can win; a traditional LD debater can win; a progressive debater can win.
 * LD Philosophy:** Honestly, nothing that I decide I want to see before a round starts has ever really been the deciding factor: it’s always been up to what happens in each round. Different match-ups result in different dynamics, and I don’t predetermine what sort of techniques I need to see in order to determine a winner. At the end of the round, someone has proved themselves to be the better debater.

However, these traits are generally preferred:

Superior logic, superior communication. I believe a round can be won with a very simple V/C framework. Responsivity to your opponent’s arguments is crucial as well.

Not as important to me:

Numerous cards, a superior case. A great case is needed, of course, but a debater wins a round through debate skills, not writing skills.