Brown,+Jon

Expericence: I have coached at Forest Lake for the past seven years. Judged alot of rounds this year, and have eight years of judgeing expericance.

Decisions: I like to vote on some form of standers, preferably value-criterian, although i will except anything that i can weigh the round to, somthing to make all the arguments make sence. This is prefered to wieghing out nebulas impacts that float around the top of the flow; largly because then i have to choose the ones i perfer, and that seems like judge intervention.

Speed and theory: I can handle speed, but if your doing a poor job i will shout, "clearer", or if that doesn't work "slower". Speak like a policy debator and i will treat you like one... I prefer big picture debate, and like to see things work out nicely in the end, i am willing to vote on theary, if it makes sence, and pretty much anything ealse that i can understand and can have a voter tied to it.

Things which bother me: I dislike things flowed threw ink...even blipy, wanky ink. Answer the bloody argument, and then you can make your impact, don't just flow it threw and make an impact.

Don't expect me to belive you just because your card said somting, i expect you to be able to warnet it, to be able to articualte it. Further, you read threw the card so fazt that no one understood it...

I find analitic warrented arguments as perswasive as evidence...tell me why somting is true and you have done a better job then most three line cards.

And i can promise to hack at your speaker points if you remain seated while speaking.

Speaker Points: Around 27, thats my agerage...i will give higher based on greatly unike or interesting arguments, and speaking style...and less for poor, dumb, or offencive arguments, and bad speaking.

I will answer any question. and i can't spell, forgive me. Jon Brown