First and foremost, I would like to let you know how much I respect all the effort you have been spending for preparing for your tournaments. I am looking forward to seeing a glimpse of how you will bring it to fruition.

I am a lay judge. I value information rich, logically consistent arguments. I also appreciate skillful rhetoric.

I will try to flow, but if contentions are dropped, make sure you make that clear and emphasize impacts of these concessions.

I used to do debate. Labor and Public Economics and Education are my specialties (I hate banking).

I am not a lay judge.

I will consider goofy arguments if they are better than serious ones. As long as they are debated correctly.

If you can make it rhyme your score will be prime. Give me a "see what I did there" to make sure I don't miss it.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DONT BE BORING. ONLY THING I HATE MORE THAN A BORING DEBATE IS POLICY DEBATE.

IMPACTS IMPACTS IMPACTS

Don't knock on the desk after each speech. Each knock is minus 0.1 speaker points. It goes up to minus 1 each time if you ignore my sad face.

If you want feedback ask me after the round. I will not be writing long RFD’s.

If both teams agree I will judge a round off of double loss theory and give very high speaker points.

Do NOT spread. I will stop listening and start playing Bloons Tower Defense 6 and instantly give you the loss. However, if you can spread without doing the breath/gasp thing then maybe I will close Bloons Tower Defense 6... maybe.

If you have a P.O.O. please say “Pause time Poop” That will be funny I think.

If the topic isn't Nuclear war then I don't wanna hear it.

I will NOT EVER accept a Counter Plan in LD, a K, or any type of disrespectful behavior.

good luck.

Experience: I have three years of experience in parliamentary debate, and am familiar with the structure and style of LD debates.

Argumentation: I want clear arguments followed by quality evidence. I expect debaters to engage in meaningful clash, which means identifying weak points in their opponents' arguments and explaining how these weaknesses either hinder their opponents' cases or bolster their own. Finally, I prefer arguments to be impactful, and will consider the weight of contentions over the quantity of them.

Time Management: I want you to talk a normal pace. I can understand if you speak quickly, but don't go too fast. I will also time you independently, and will give a grace period if time is up to wrap things up. From there I will respectfully cut you off if you continue on.