Frawley,+Evan

Hiya, I'm Evan and I'm currently a Freshman at the University of Washington. I debated LD in high school for 4 years, debating both in local and national circuit. I would probably consider myself to be a progressive judge/debater. I am generally open to interesting or new arguments, as long as they are well developed and well warranted. I am NOT open to shady tactics like having sketchy args in an overview or underview.

I've been out of the scene for almost a year now though, so make your args really really clear. Also, you can spread if you want, but if I can't understand you, then I'll say clear or slow once, and then its up to you to change after that. I'm not a huge fan of kritikal arguments, but if you can really really really explain it well and make the link and impacts really clear then I'll consider voting for it. Your job is to tell me who won the debate, its not mine to figure it out. This is a persuasive activity, so persuade me. I'm fine with theory but don't be a jerk with it. Only use it to check abuse. Just make it easy to understand / super clear and you're golden. I like plans as long as they're interesting and engaging. Please no skep, I really don't like skep. Brownie pts if you include a Legaue/Hearthstone/Starcraft reference in your arguments.