Tl;dr
  • I'd classify myself as a progressive with traditional tendencies. I like clash on the topic; I enjoy interesting and weird arguments and can be persuaded to vote on anything as long as we're having a real discussion of the resolution.
  • I can flow spread just fine; however, I don't like spread when it is used as a barrier for discourse.
  • Signpost like nobody's business.
  • Don't refer to a card in rebuttals by its author's surname. Instead, extend what the card says. If you're spreading, know that I often miss card names when flowing so that I can get what the card really says. Knowing that you had a card and knowing what it says is more important to me than knowing which Ph.D wrote it.
  • Don’t say false things. Your argument has to make sense for me to buy it; I won't just accept a card if you can't explain it to a skeptical opponent. I have absolutely no problem dropping someone on falsified evidence alone.
  • I love framework and discussion of the meta.
  • I'm a big backpack rap fan--work in a Watsky, Macklemore, Wax, or Dumbfoundead reference and I'll smile and be happy with you (and probably don my fairy wand and reward your speaker points).

Here is a link to my full paradigm, a verbose discussion of my thoughts on the activity to which I've dedicated much of my life for the past six years. Read it if you're bored. Or don't.

http://judgephilosophies.wikispaces.com/Vrana%2C+Zack


CONSTRAINTS:
Brookfield East
Whitefish Bay