Walker,+Wesley

I debated two years for Liberty University. I was a flexible debater for most of my career but towards the end I was reading Wilderson on the aff and neg. Be cordial. If you are a jerk, I will dock your speaker points. There's a difference between being confident/funny and being unnecessarily mean. I will pay attention in your round and do my absolute best to be fair. Even if I have certain biases, you can persuade me otherwise. The clearer you are about what your argument is and what it entails, the more likely you are to get higher speaker points. Feel free to execute whatever strategy you're good at. Do what you do.

Prep Time: I was a paperless debater. I understand that crap happens and stuff gets messed up. I will be graceful as long as you aren't taking advantage of that.

Performance/No plan text Affs: I'm absolutely fine if you don't defend the resolution but I think you should at least tie your advocacy in with the topic and that you should defend some kind of consistent advocacy. No one learns anything if you shift your standpoint the entire debate. I do prefer to hear critical affs as oppossed to policy (but I'm comfortable hearing a policy aff).

Theory: If the other team is really cheating, go for it. In my ideal policy world, the NEG gets 2 CPs and 1 K conditionally (not 2 Ks and a CP though). Anything less than that, I think is fair but I could be persuaded otherwise. If you go for condo just because you are behind on the substance of the debate, I won't give you as many speaker points. If you're reading a K on the aff, I like hearing how your viewpoint sees conditionality. That's how I won my last debate ever.

K: I have debated predominantly Cap, Speciesism, and Wilderson. I feel comfortable with most arguments but please do not talk about an author and expect me to understand your entire argument. Articulate, articulate, artiulate. I enjoy Ks the most but you have got to give me clear analysis to earn my ballot.