Pasquinelli,+Rennie

**me:** I debated at Michigan. I coach Denver East (Independent).

**general**: There's not much I won't vote on. Any well-explained and well-constructed argument is one that I would vote on. If you can explain things and give good impact calculus, I will want to vote for you and give you good speaker points!

**"non-traditional" affs**: The trend of copying & pasting affs from college wikis is a terrible form of education and debate. If you can't explain the thesis of your aff, what a ballot means, etc., I won't really want to vote for you. I have no problem voting for an aff that doesn't have a plan if you debate it well.

**framework**: I judge a lot of framework vs. no-plan aff debates (these are the majority of my aff debates in college). Similar to what I've written above, I think some teams that read high theory arguments in high school are a bit confused and have a difficult time explaining their aff. Framework is an appealing argument to me when it is explained contextually (when you talk about the aff).

**etc.**: Don't be mean. Debate should be a fun/educational space for everyone. That being said, if you're reading an argument or use discourse that is super offensive to someone/some group, you'll get low speaks and I won't want to vote for you!

I give high speaks if you are pleasant and smart :~)
 * speaker points: **


 * Use an email chain or Pocket Box or whatever. **

If you have questions you can email me at renniepasquinelli@gmail.com.