Rogers,+James

TL;DR: flow judge, down for theory, speed, K, idgaf. Used to Parli, if there's some weird quirk about LD that I need to know, explain it to me, otherwise I'll just evaluate it as a debate.

**Background/Experience:** 6 years as a competitor, 3 as coach. **On speaking style:** Talk as fast as you need to. I say slow, it means talk less fast; I say clear, it means articulate better. If you exclude your opponents, they get access to theory or K arguments that that's a bad thing. **On general argumentation:** The only impact which I automatically assume is bad is death. I am open to arguments that it is neutral or good. If you don't explain why your claim is true, the other team doesn't to explain why it's false; presumption says err against you. If they straight-up drop it, it flows through. Evaluate impacts in terms of timeframe, magnitude, and probability. Don't claim to win all of them, because you don't. Pick 1 or 2 and explain why they matter more than the others. If I don't know where you are on the flow, I'll put my pen down and put my hands on my head. **On Theory:** I will listen to any theory or procedural argument you wish to make, with whatever voters you wish to argue. If your theory sheet should win you the round, you need to have a clear interp, be winning the standards debate, and have voters **On K**: I'm open to any K, but not super familiar with most K lit, except cap bad. When the other team is being bigoted in their rhetoric, explain why they should lose for it and I will sign my ballot. I don't care that that goes against being tab, I will not let you be oppressive and exclusionary in the debatespace. If they're not actually being bigoted and you're going for a cheap shot, your speaks will reflect that. **DA/CP:** Almost always a solid neg strat. Condo might be bad. PICs might be bad. argue it out.