Amoranto,+Andrew


 * Updated: 12/11/2012**


 * __My Competitive/Judging History:__**

I competed in Policy Debate for James Logan High School (Union City, CA) from 2006-2010. I did both slow and circuit debate and competed at various tournaments including: Glenbrooks, CAL, Stanford, USC, Long Beach, and State. I placed 9th in Policy Debate at the California State Tournament in 2009. My speaking positions were 2N/1A.

I've been judging Policy and Public Forum on and off since I graduated high school. (2010 - Present) I'm an assistant coach for Olive Children Foundation (Fremont, CA). (2012 - Present)

__**My Judging Preferences:**__

- Speed is fine as long as you slow down on tag lines/analysis. Many policy rounds devolve into tagline debate with little to no clash and I'd prefer a slower debate with an emphasis of quality over quantity. I will never tell you to be clear, I'll just stop flowing all together and hope you look up and adjust. - I'll pull the trigger on anything as long as you explain to me why it's the most important thing in the round. This goes for performance, kritikal affs, shady frameworks/theory, etc. Don't think I'll vote for literally any argument, you need to do the work in-round. If the argument is based on illogical/impossible reasoning, there's probably not much work you can put into it. - I'll always look for an easy way out to vote so close every door in your final speech. I'd rather not piece together an extremely complex flow because I can't guarantee I'll prevail on your position.

__**For LD/Parli:**__

- I understand how LD cases/arguments function and, to me, Parli debates are very similar to Policy. I'm still a little unclear about the structure (time allocation) of the whole round so please remind me. - Speed is fine as well, just refer to what was stated above. - I'd prefer if you framed/weighed your impacts similar to Policy (Timeframe, Magnitude, Probability, etc.), but I understand that many debate arguments don't necessarily fit that framework. Just know this is my default framework for evaluating arguments in other forms of debate if no other framework is given.

__**Additional Comments:**__

- If you talk non-sense or make awkward comments, I will laugh. You can avoid this by using logic/warrants to support your claims. - Please keep track of your own time.