Stewart,+Michael

My history is such that I have participated in Lincoln-Douglas, policy, public forum, and congressional debate. The vast majority of it was spent in a very traditional district in Lincoln-Douglas. That being said, I believe my varied background does allow for an understanding of progression in each format of debate. I am not entirely shut off to hearing anything, I just might not wear a smile. Though not my favorite arguments, I have voted on topicality and theory. Now, getting to specifics.

First and foremost, LD is evaluative debate. It doesn't necessarily always call for specific action, normally its justifying an action or state. You don't have to have a plan. Additionally, there is framework, and substance that I evaluate through those frameworks, I like the substance debates a bit mor but am more than okay listening to GOOD framework debate. I like to hear about the resolution, someone took some time writing it, and I find it respectful talk about it. The role of the ballot begins at the round as whoever wins the debate wins the round. I like it there, but if you want to change it, then I can play along. Finally on card calling, I don't like to do it. Your presentation of evidence should tell me everything I need to know about it. Also slow down for authors and tag lines.

One last note: be respectful. Don't call your opponent names. And don't insult their arguments, just argue against them. Don't tell me that it makes "literally no sense," point out how it makes no sense.

In summation, run whatever you are happiest with, I might not be a large fan, but it's your competition, not mine. Be great, be respectful, have fun.