Brooks,+Jason

Jason Brooks
While I can be persuaded otherwise, I think the following should occur:

1. The affirmative team should have a clearly defined and written plan text that supports this year’s resolution. I also believe that the affirmative should defend action by the Federal Government in Washington, D.C.

2. The negative should be willing to write down the text of their critique alternative or be VERY SPECIFIC about what it is and not waver from that description.

A few other random facts:

1. I will not read evidence purely because you say “read our cards.” I will, however, read specific cards if the warrants of the cards are questioned by the other team, or there is a good debate over a particular argument and reading the cards is the best way to resolve an argument. Be specific when referencing your cards and attacking the warrants in your opponent’s cards.

2. I prefer debates that focus around a few central arguments. Six or seven offcase arguments are extreme.

3. Please don't make the argument that fiat is illusory or similar arguments as to why voting affirmative doesn't really do anything in terms of real world change. Voting affirmative simply endorses a world where the government SHOULD take action. If the affirmative can win that there are benefits to taking that action they stand a good chance of winning.

4. When evaluating critiques, I generally view these arguments as utopian counterplans with some sort of a net benefit. Too many teams fail to adequately prove why the alternative does not solve for the affirmative advantages. Reading some disadvantages to the alternative is a good place to start.

5. Impact work is very important. I have found many teams this year, especially when a K is involved, blip over and fail to give a coherent impact story in the 2nr/2ar. I am willing to vote against a DA or critique on no impact arguments if they are not handled appropriately.

6. If you are going to go for theory, please handle it like any other argument. I expect a clearly defined link and impact story if you want me to vote for it. I also expect you to debate the line-by-line and not just read your blocks every speech. While I have been persuaded by Aff arguments in the past, I tend to err negative on CP theory, especially on PICs.

If you have any questions please feel free to ask.