De+Stefano,+Sean

Bio: I did LD debate my junior and senior year of highschool, going to TFA state both times and NFL nationals my junior year. I debated for Cedar Ridge High school.

Overview: Generally, I don't care what you run. I ran a variety of cases during my career and read a lot of the applicable literature. Anything you want to do is perfectly fine and I will evaluate the round however you tell me to. I don't lean towards any particular argument and I don't mind voting against my own personal views.

Theory: I have no issues with theory nor do i care how you run it. So long as its warranted and has an impact i will accept it. Note however that i will not assume theory comes before the topical debate; anything regarding the impact of the theory debate should be done by the debater. Running an Rvi is perfectly fine, as is straying from the normal structure. I don't take a preference between counter-interps and normal arguments, i will prefer whichever you tell me to.

K's: Most likely i will have heard of whatever you are running. This is what i most often ran during my debate career and so i am well-versed in the literature. If i believe you are running an author incorrectly i will most likely tell you, however i wont hold it against you when evaluating the round or your speaks.

Offs, Cp's, DA's, ect: Go for it. Run as many off's as you want, be as abusive as you want. If you think you can handle the theory backlash, then i have no problems with this strategy. Just make sure everything is impacted correctly, i wont evaluate the argument if there is no impact.

Extensions: just make them clear and concise. You don't have to say the word "extend", just talking about the issue is enough for me.

Speed: go as fast as you want, speed is not going to be an issue for me. However, if you are unclear i will say clear once, after that you are on your own. Your speaks will also drop considerably.

Speaks: most of your points will come from being clear, concise, and easy to understand. If i can comprehend everything your doing without the least bit of confusion, then you will be fine.

One last note because i think it is very important. I will default to a truth testing paradigm if i am not told to do otherwise. Keep in mind that i do not believe merely running a policy type case is enough to warrant me changing this paradigm, you must specifically tell me to evaluate the round in a different manner.

Any other questions just ask or email me at seanadestefano@gmail.com