Hunt,+Alicia

Alicia Hunt In General: I debated for a year at MSU (Africa topic) and then coached high school debate at Seaholm HS and Detroit Country Day School in Michigan. They debated regionally, nationally, and at the TOC level in good years. When I coached them, they were mostly straight up policy teams running T, disads, counterplans, and case. (I was not responsible for making them wear their snazzy blazers or plaid ties.) I have judged ZERO debates going into the coast of this college topic. I have judged hundreds of high school debates since leaving MSU. Please remember that I have limited experience with this topic this when using acronyms or jargon that isn’t obvious. Also, keep this in mind for T debates. To win, I believe that teams should generally win one big offensive position and play defense to the other team's big offense. Flowing: I try to flow what you say. I think I can flow moderate speed if you're clear. I will try to protect the 2nr. To me, this means going through and crossing out any args that I can't trace back to the 1ar or what answers the 2nr args. Please try and extend cards by author/date. I think args that are dropped are conceded and I can be convinced that args are “true” for the purposes of the debate based on the evidence that is read there. Plans: If you are aff, you should have one. It should take some sort of resolutional action. Topicality: Again, I have very little experience with this topic. I am not at all familiar with the T arguments. Your extension of any T arguments should keep that in mind. Disads: I like disads. Counterplans: I like counterplans of all varieties, as long as they are competitive. I don't really care if your cp is unconditional, dispositional, or conditional. I err neg on cp theory. I can be persuaded that consult cps are legit. Critical args: I’m ok with these. I’m not very well read in many of these args. I don't cut these args, I don't read these args for fun. If you explain what the arg is, and what the impact is, and what you want me to do, I will vote on it. I am open to rez based kritiks, but I think I’m often more compelled by specific plan action-ks. Don’t think that these args necessarily need an alternative (textual or otherwise), but I’m compelled by theory args against this, too. Framework: I come into the debate thinking it will be about which policy the usfg should adopt toward somewhere in the Middle East. I am open to scrapping this framework, but tell me what you want me to do, and how I should go about evaluating the round from there.