Fairbanks,+Heather

Preferences:

I can be described as "Ridiculously Old School": I think that judge adaptation is (sadly) somewhat of a lost art, but if you ask my preferences you should be prepared to conform to them (if you don't ask, of course I'll be forced to judge based on the content of the round...but if you ask, then disreguard when you don't like my preferences, that's just annoying).

And since you asked...

I'm NOT a fan of speed - I hesitate to say I was a policy debater because that makes students think they can/should spew at me. I do flow, and I judge heavily off my flow - so if I can't catch your tags, the result won't be what you want. Also, I primarily flow TAGS, not sources - so rather than referring to "Johnson 1" and "Johnson 3" how about you just give me the tag so I know where we are?

I DO strongly consider speaking skills. And reward them. I'm much more easily convinced by someone I can understand than someone who throws a million arguments out there that I vaguely catch. Choose your position thoughtfully, explain it well, and compare it to your opponent - take the time to be persuasive.

I will NOT tolerate rude behavior in the round. Take off your hat, tuck in your shirt, don't read over your opponent's shoulder, tread the line between witty and snarky very carefully - and don't tell me when to start and stop my timer, if you're not speaking you're prepping and my clock is counting down.

Specific arguments: don't assume I know your jargon, and do take the time to explain yourself well - at that point I can be convinced of almost anything.