Robinson,+Miloran

Conflicts:Atlanta Urban Debate League
 * Name: Miloran “Milo” Robinson**
 * Current Affiliation: North Division**
 * Debate Experience:** 4 years in high school, 2.5 years at Georgia State University. Debated in the Milwaukee Urban Debate League since from2006-2009 and coached since then. Worked with the Atlanta Urban Debate League while at Georgia State. Worked with North Division for the last 2 seasons.
 * How many rounds have you judged in 2014-15:** This year I have judged only about 30 rounds, don’t let the number fool you. I think I’m pretty awesome, debate doesn’t change a lot so try me.
 * If you do not want an honest judge that won’t sugar coat my decision, then don’t have me in the back of the room*****

1. Case Arguments: generics are acceptable, but I like to hear arguments that are more specific and show that you but some work in. A good case debate can either win or lose the round when it comes down to off case. 2. Kritiks: some of them are over my head, but I have a pretty good grasp of them. Know what you are reading 3.Disads are nice. If you do run them make sure you did the work on the internal link story and have updates especially for politics and econ. I like politics as long as you can explain the story and it would make perfect sense. 4.I like performance/advocacy debate. It is refreshing to see debaters that are passionate for their cause and willing to be different from the norm not just because it’s cool but also because they want others to understand. I do believe that with these arguments there needs to be either a plan text or an advocacy statement.
 * List 4 types of arguments that you prefer to listen to/debate. For example, do you like to debate disadvantages? Do you like disadvantages as long as the disads aren’t the politics DA?**

1.Topicality- my threshold for voting on T is very low because a lot of the rounds I have seen and even been in are very shallow on the explanation of voters and standards, but if you feel you can do it go for it! 2.There isn’t much that I won’t vote on. 3. 4.
 * What I haven’t voted on a lot**

1.Line by line 2. I love when ppl tell me what the aff/neg world will look like post plan 3. Clash is important, tell me how the arguments interact. The best example is on framework debates. Show me how your framework as compared to the other teams allows for the most educational or fair debate
 * List 4 stylistics items you like to do or like watch other people do. For example, do you like debates that go line by line, meaning debaters use their flows to answer each argument that is presented in the order it was presented?**

1.Don’t tool your partner, yes it’s important to help your partner but answering every question or telling them where to go next during their speeches is annoying and doesn’t help them learn the skill better. 2. The faster we speak the more clear you need to be. I say clear twice, if you are still unclear I drop my pen. 3. Breadth over depth. Go in depth with your arguments
 * List 4 stylistics items you do not like to watch other people do. For example, do you dislike when other debaters answer their partner’s cross-x questions?**