To,+Quoc

I did policy 4 years in HS, graduated Cal and am finishing up my JD. I have been out of debate for a while, and have not judged in a tourney in 2 years. However, I spend many a days arguing in a courtroom as an intern for Contra Costa County public defender's office, so I am still a debater by profession.

So, with that said, I am fine with speed since I did debate, just keep that in mind that I am out of policy-esque speed practice. I do not want to tell you how to debate and what arguments you should make, but if you are going to go fast, sign post and be very clear. If you make a great argument but go too fast, you will risk me not flowing it or giving it the proper attention.

Also, by the rebuttals, I would much rather hear fewer, but very well reasoned and developed arguments than you spreading more and more evidence and rebuttal cards. Whatever speed you sacrifice in my round, you can make it up with well-reasoned arguments. I won't vote for BS. For ex, if you run a DA, develop the internal links and impact it. Explain why CP solves for DA if you run it. If you run a K, please link and develop your alternative well. (I was an exclusive K debater in hs, but as you get older and more "real world" minded, they become a lot less appealing, so you must really explain the argument and your alternatives well if you want me to pick you up on it b/c without it, your asking me to accept the squo, which sucks). But again, develop your arguments well or I won't vote for it.

Aff: Please don't forget about your case. Its why were in the round, to debate about a policy I should pick up. I will vote as a policy maker at the end of the round. So even if you are losing on many arguments or the line by line, but there are one or two in the round that you believe you are winning and you do a good job of convincing me that its the most important consideration at the end of the round and why it o/w all, I'll pick you up.

Neg: don't go for everythign in the outrounds. Pick one or two you are winning, and mpx it for me. Also, while I am voting as a policy maker, it doesn't mean don't run Ks. If you convince me that I should look at the round in a vacuum and engage in esoteric thinking in order to promote education, I'll be happy to do so and remove myself as a policy maker. But its your job to make the argument.

This goes for both sides: During rebuttals, I love overviews. Show me a holistic view of the round. Summarize the arguments for me and tell me how to vote. Don't read cards. As a "policy maker", and as someone who practices law in real life, I appreciate impact calc and well reasoned arguments to summarize the round. You can still pick up my vote even if you are losing most arguments because its the most important arguments that matter.