Background: I debated for West Bend West High school for four years, three in PF and 1 in LD.

I graduated in 2013 and have been judging since then.

In general: I vote based off of what’s on the flow. If you’re speaking so fast I can’t understand you, I won’t be writing anything. Similarly, I think it’s important for you to extend arguments,not cards. Telling me to extend Jones 2 doesn’t have nearly the effect of saying to extend whatever point you’re making, because in the end, the card is just what you’re using to prove the argument.

Clash is very important. Don’t just read evidence contrary to your opponent’s evidence and say that that’s why it should flow to you—delve into the warrants/methodology/source/analysis/etc and tell me why what you’re saying better fulfills the value/criterion. Don’t just say that because you read something in your case that contradicts your opponent’s case I should cross-apply everything you said and flow all their points to you.

I prefer traditional-style LD. I am not a fan of counterplans, etc.

I don’t flow CX, but I do pay attention. Don’t be rude.

Make sure to clearly state your voters and weigh their impacts. When deciding how to vote, the value/criterion are terribly important because they’re really the ultimate weighing mechanism. Don’t forget about them; it’s likely that unless there’s a disagreement I’ll vote on the criterion.

I’m not going to disclose or give oral critiques.

If you have questions or if there’s anything I missed, feel free to ask.