Amos,+Matt

Debated at Decatur HS (TX)

Speed can be fine if it is clear. If it is not i will put my pencil down and cross my arms, yell clear, or a combination of both.

I hate Open CX but Open CX is allowed, but will cost huge speaker points for the person having to be helped by his teammate.

Make sure you clearly explain the significance of all of your impacts. An example of not doing this would be, "the status quo is causing mass pollution and destruction of the environment". This has no impact upon people or even animals. Also numbers in evidence are of the utmost importants for signifigance. No cards that say lots of people will suffer need numbers, unless if it says our economy will collapse (which is a bit vague anyways). **__Misquoting evidence, and I do not mean an accidental interchanging of words, but saying that something is in your evidence when it is not will result in an automatic voting down.__** I will usually ask to see certain evidence at the end of the round.
 * __Evidence:__**

__**Judging:**__ I'm straight up Tabula Rasa, give me a framework to evaluate the round with, and why you win in that framework then you win the round. If no framework is given i will default to policy maker. My philosophy on policy maker is that it is simply stock issues plus weighing the round. You can win round even if you lose a stock issue, if your impacts are still higher without.

Stock Issues: Winning stock issues can be the best way to win a round, i am not saying that it is because I am still Tabula Rasa. Topicality is fine, even as a timesuck, but you can still argue it was a timesuck, just easily refutible. The only issue i can judge myself of whether or not the information is presented is signifigance. This is the impact card on or after the Harms. it must be their or harms can be completely worthless.

If you have any more questions, ask me before the round.