Drabczyk,+Zak

For the most part I am a tab judge. Although I come with some preconceived notions regarding general morality (racism is bad, people dying is bad etc.) I will prefer the framework that I am told to prefer; given there are no competing frameworks in that case I will weigh the frameworks and decide by the end of the 2AR how to evaluate the round.

I will vote on almost anything. I enjoy the kritik, granted the team making said criticism actually understands the criticism. I do vote on topicality; however, I believe the Affirmative has some precedent in establishing what is topical therefore topicality needs to be well developed and argued for me to vote on it.

I detest rudeness in the round but I do not believe it is a voting issue. If one team is rude beyond my threshold I will deduct speaker points. This is my incentive towards a civil and educational debate round.

Speed - not an issue. I debated for three years and am well familiar with spreading in debate. If for some unusual reason, through speed or other means, I am unable to understand the speech I will audibly say "clear" in a way that is minimally invasive.

Tag teaming - not an issue. I do not mind tag teaming especially if in cross-x to help clarify for me or the other team. Tag teaming can become excessive at which point I may deduct speaker points so please do not become a 'puppet master'.

If no framework in the round is given, I default policy framework and weigh the round through stock issues.