Dickerson,+Mike

Moore high School

I was a debater at Moore for 4 years. I am now debating for the University of Central Oklahoma. I am pretty much willing to vote on anything as long as it is impacted out well. I tend to place a high emphasis on specificity of arguments.

T- I tend to be on the reasonability side of T, but I am willing to forego that if the neg spends a lot of time and care developing it.

Disads- I love these. The More specific the better.

Counterplans- I really enjoy counter-plan debates for the most part, but I not a big fan of consult or delay CP’s.

Theory- Like with T, I’m mostly on the reasonability side ( I’m pretty sure that neg fiat isn’t abusive). I’m still willing to vote on it, but please for the love of god don’t flood the round with them. There’s nothing worse than having 4 theory violations scattered on the flow.

K’s- I like these. I am mostly aware of the kritikal literature out there and am willing to vote on anything, but make sure that the link and the general story of the K is emphasized in your speeches. Try to have a specific link; it’s really easy for the aff to win the perm against a generic state use link.

Overall just please go for what you know and are comfortable with.