Sorenson,+Rob

I'm a traditional judge - I consider the value/criteria debate to be most important. Your contentions should flow naturally from your VC and should be clearly and intentionally related. I'm quite skeptical of theory and kritiks, so if you want to run these, you will need also to argue convincingly as to why I should vote on these sorts of things. I expect debaters to actually engage the resolution, rather than trying to redefine or avoid the commonsense intention of the resolution.

Don't try to spread. I value clarity, fluency, and eloquence and have limited tolerance for speed. I will not vote for a debater whose case I cannot easily follow and flow.