Sara+Stephens

I debated at Pensacola High school in Florida for 4 years and I just graduated from the University of Texas at Dallas where i also debated for four years. I'm pretty dependent on my flow. Speed is fine. I think impact calculus is very important. When both sides are winning some arguments the team that will win the debate is the team that gives the explanation of why their arguments ar more important for me. I think it is possible to win a argument with just defense but it is difficult and you have to have a ton of it. Your obviously in a much better position with offense.

Disads: like them CPs - love them. especially creative PICS Kritiks/non traditional debate I will listen to any argument but I am most familiar with traditional policy debate with disads and counterplans. That doesnt mean i cant judge kritiks or will be likely to vote against them. I will know who won the debate but i probably wont be able to provides tons of additional insight to your author's arguments.

Theory: i will vote on it if your winning it regardless of my personal biases on the issue as long as you have given the explanation of when you win the argument why it means i reject the team and it means you win the debate. I kinda think negative teams in high school can probably easily get away with things like multiple conditional counterplans, 2nc counterplans and other things that some may think are abusive because many people don't seem prepared on the aff to really defend the theory on it. Maybe i'm wrong...but i encouragae negatives who think they can defend themselves on theory to use such strategies when necessary.

Topicality: if you win it is a voting issue as long as you have provided a warrant. however, i will vote for kritiks of T. I would say as long as affs just have good defense on these issues then i will vote aff. Its a lot better to have a counterinterpretation.