Name: Tim Ernst
Debate history: 4 years High School Debate, 4 years college debate (2 in CEDA/NDT and 2 in NPDA), 10 years judging, 10 years coaching (HS policy, LD, and public forum; College parli and NFA-LD)
Number of rounds judged on this topic: 20
Paradigm: Policymaker

There are a few key things I look for in round:
1) Weighing of impacts--Impact calculus is critical to debate. I need specific reasons why I need to evaluate your arguments. This requires framing the debate, using "even if" statements, as well as standard impact calculus.
2) I believe Kritiks should have competitive alternatives to the plan. Without competition, the kritik is nothing more than a non-unique case turn, and the aff can address it as such.
3) I will vote on topicality Topicality is competing interpretations for me. This means that you need to focus on the standards debate. Again, this requires framing of the T debate, as well as impact calculus.
4) I will listen to performance, but I don't think a debate can be won just on the fact that you perform. I view performance as a means of claiming personal agency, but that in and of itself is not enough to win a debate. You still must defend the warrants of your arguments, and I will listen to policy oriented responses to performance.
5) Theory is not my strong suit. Explain yourself well and, go slow.
6) I don't mind speed, but clarity is necessary. You ought to go slower on tags and cites. I like to keep a complete flow, so this will be to your benefit.

Most importantly, be yourselves and have fun. I like a good natured, competitive debate with lots of clash.

If you have other questions, I will do my best to answer them.