Background: 4 year policy debater in the state of Wisconsin for Cedarburg. Currently judging for SPASH and Cedarburg

Constraints: Cedarburg and SPASH.

Judging Philosophy:

I'm tabs. Meaning I will vote on just about anything if you argue it well. In my years I ran just about everything, K's, CP's, and even a bit of irony.

I'm fine on speed with most everything. Its hard to find a few people that are too fast. That said if you are too fast I'll tell you and its no big deal the first time. Please listen. More important is clarity. Please be clear, and I'll tell you if your not. Don't mumble your cites if you refer to them later. It happens way to much. Also delineate when you go on to the next card, be it speed change, voice inflection, or saying something like Next. Helps me flow, helps you win.

Open cross ex, yup. Take the ev if you need too. For the love of God split the block. Speak from wherever, stuff like that doesn't matter.

That said I have a few things I want to go into specifics:

On case:
I like it, but please for the love of God tell me what point your going off of from the previous speach, and don't just read 10 cards with no analysis. If at the end of the round I have 5 card from each side saying somthing different but no analysis, it will make me sad inside. Create the clash and I will like you and pick you up. That applies to everything too, create the clash and make it easy to flow. It makes it easier to write down your name on the winner line.

Topicality/Theory:
On this I want some in round abuse as part of your arguments. If they aren't substantial tell me why that makes it impossible for you to win ever. Examples are good. When you are going though your 20+ point theory block slow down a tad, its a lot to get down, and if you want me to pick you up, I want you to expound at the end about what was bad and why it was bad. Extend my partners 20 points will not win you a round. I will listen and might vote on condo, depends how good you are at it.

DA:
Disads are great, but make sure your link is solid. A DA being generic doesn't hurt it, but affs can most of time analytic away the link, so again, link should be solid. You may not win if you win your DA's case may outweigh. Impact calc is HUGE in the 2NR and 2AR. It wins you rounds, and you should spend time doing it. Don't go for everything, but don't go for too much either. Hopefully by now you know what and how to kick out of your arguments if you wanna win.

CPs:
I like em and I'll listen to them. A cp does NOT have to be untopical, but it should be competitive in some way. There are some CPs that could be considered cheating, such as delay, some pics, or consult, which theory can be ran on and win that theory. Affs have to do works on the perm, but all in all i think CP's are straight forward.

K:
I like the K but run it right. I know a lot of different K's but if your running it regardless if its biopower or cap, I want you to explain it well in the rebutals and give me a picture of why what they're doing is bad, and what the alternative is, and what that alternative does. Just run it well, know wtf your talking about, and I'll listen to the K.

Anyways I think you get the idea, If you have any questions on specifics don't be afraid to ask. I'm fine with talking with Y'all, and I'm glad to help in any way they might need. I'll give oral critiques and disclose too.