Xue,+Jesse

Background I have debated all four years of high school. Two of the years in CX at Grapevine High School and the other two in LD at Seven Lakes High School. I consider myself a flow-centric judge and with that being said clash is perhaps the biggest thing for me in a debate. Debate rounds become especially irritating if both debaters are just extending their cases and cross-applying them to their opponents but not actually doing any real work into how they're winning the round. Evidence comparison and line by line are at the top of my list of what makes a good debater.

Speed I am all for speed but if you cannot spread clearly please do not attempt to. You will get one warning and then I will stop flowing. Disclaimer: I've gotten worse at flowing after not debating for a while. I will try my best but don't expect a pristine flow if you're extremely fast.

Framework I am willing to evaluate any framework but that debate is generally not my favorite. I am much more comfortable with a policymaking/util debate above all others but feel free to run any other framework as long as it is clarified.

K Debate Not my favorite debate but I have no problem in voting on a K. As long as there is a clear Role of the Ballot, clear link and impact, I will evaluate it. Be sure to explain what the K is actually saying in clear terms.

Plan/CP Plans are fine as long as they are theoretically defended. Counter-plans need to have some competition justified within the first neg speech otherwise it is just non-competitive. Both plan and counter-plan texts should be read slowly if you want me to flow it.

DA You should have a solid link that can either link into the aff specific or the resolution in general. Impact calculus would be fantastic.

Theory More and more, theory is used for some time or strat skew which is something I usually will not vote for unless completely dropped. However, if a theory argument has a clear violation/abuse and standards and uses a significant portion of the debater's time then I am much more willing to buy it (ie don't read a 30 second shell). Please don't spread through your violation or standards, it becomes extremely difficult to flow. RVI's are not a voter.

Speaks I base speaks off strategy and to a lesser extent speaking ability. Here's my breakdown.

~25 - you messed up big time ~26 - needs lot of improvement/missing fundamentals 27.5 - average debater ~28 - shot at breaking ~29 - high elims ~30 - likely to win the tournament

Lastly, i f I do not understand your advocacy, I will not vote for you. Be courteous to each other and feel free to ask me questions after round. I feel like there is sometimes a lack of transparency within debate because of hesitancy for debaters and judges to clarify what was written in the ballot: Therefore do not be afraid to ask me about my decision at a reasonable time.