Varian,Lee

First Style- I yell clear a lot- don't get offended, im just interested in what you're saying. I love theory and it pains me when you rip through it too fast for me to flow. 2/3rds speed on theory if you want a ballot.

Second Substance- I try as hard as I can to be a TAB judge- so in a perfect world none of the following has any impact on my decision- but in the real world these are the prefs i struggle to overcome. The most important pref I have is that I give much more weight to good analytical arguments than most judges do. I, in fact think that the vast majority of people reading this are smarter than the vast majority of people writing cards used in debate, and as such will gladly vote for warranted analytics against unwarranted evidence.

specifics-

T- Huge fan, I dont have any kind of artificial threshold to pull the trigger, my default is understanding it as a set of competing interpretations in which i obviously evaluate potential abuse- but feel free to change my mind. I REALLY like teams that argue T (and theory in general) in an innovative fashion that doesn't just regurgitate the same tired tag line arguments I used.

The K- Impacts, Impacts, Impacts. I love the K but put a huge emphasis on impact calc. This will inevitably have a lot to do with the framework flow- but I really respect teams that make specific arguments as to how the intellectual bankruptcy of the opposing team affects the FIAT implications of the case. I am of course open to discursive links and implications as well. I don't need an alt- I am ok with the concept of the neg proving that the intellectual justification of the aff (or neg) is bunk and thats all.

Disads- In the Disad/Case world i am surprisingly old school. I really enjoy disads with sound link stories and less sexy impact scenarios. I think that I tend to vote against arguments that go "1 in a million risk of extinction beats a 100% risk of ending poverty" more than the average dude. If i hear a good analysis about voting for the very likely good against the very unlikely scary- I'll pick them up.

CP- I was NEVER a CP debater. This should be known. Because of that fact i am less tuned to the details of the arg. That being said its obviously a very strategic arg and i will give it full weight- just dont assume i can flow your lighting speed pics args. take it down to 3/4s speed- please.

Case- Love case debate. Period. Devastating args. Will vote on 1 good case turn.

Lastly- i believe in 0% risk. If you win that theres no link, there is not a risk of a link.

Also- be funny.