Blum,+Ruby

Eight years combined debating and coaching. Currently work in public policy and government. Political science and international studies background.

Truth before tech.

For the surveillance topic, make sure you're at the heart of the topic or have a strong topicality answer. Creative affirmatives are encouraged, just don't make topicality the go to argument for the negative. Critical affirmatives fine as long as a concrete action is advocated by the plan and at least some of the advantages relate back to the topic.

Speed is fine, but you absolutely need to be clear. If you aren't clear going fast, then you better slow down.

Have links specific to the affirmative - whether those be discursive links, links off of plan action, or off of something the plan causes – they just need to go beyond a simple link to USFG action. Links of omission generally not preferred. If you work hard enough you can find a way to make your critique work.

Framework is greatly appreciated in debates, it helps me as a judge decide how to evaluate the debate. I don't want to have to blindly decide which impacts matter more.

If you're going to run politics, please make sure there's a basis in reality. There are plenty of legitimate scenarios about the political implications of different actions. Qualified authors/sources and solid political analysis appreciated. Good analytics will carry weight against bad politics scenarios.

Please don't highlight anything less than complete words in evidence.

Taylor Swift lyrics used contextually, will result in higher speaker points.