A little bit about me:
I am a flow judge
I flow everything, and I look at cards to see if they are real, even if opponents don't want to see them
I need a speech doc if someone reads over 230 wpm
If someone speaks over 200 wpm, the opponents can tell the other team to speak slower
I do Public Forum and Lincoln Douglas and NO SPEECH EVENTS
I choose the winner based on my flow (if something doesn't get onto my flow, it won't have a role in who the winner is)
I disclose only if both teams are okay with that
Be nice, and don't just claim things
I may ask for cards if I see a team claiming a crazy thing
I do not consider anything "common sense" so I won't listen to a team who tries to tell me that their claim is true because it is "common sense"
- I always know the topics very well, and I can smell lies from a mile away, so I will note if a team tries to lie
Theory: If you run theory, you have to explain it very well. I'll buy any sort of theory, as long as it is well explained.
Evidence/Cards: Paraphrasing cards is allowed. but people may not misuse cards in anyway (e.x. adding words into a cut card).
Prog: If you run progs, then just explain them very well. I'm not very experienced with Progs, so if you want me to buy those arguments, you have to talk in a simple way and explain yourself very clearly.
Cases: I don't allow counterplans in PF (you shouldn't run counterplans anyways) and I also don't like cases with 4 or more contentions because then it's just way too many arguments to flow.
DA's: I allow running DA's in your case as long as you explain them well.
Rebbutals: Rebbutals must respond to every single case argument of then I consider those arguments dropped.
Summary/Final Focus: I will evaluate stuff brought up in summary as long as it is a response made against a rebuttal argument. Weighing must be brought up in summary, or then I will not evaluate it. Also, new points may not be brought up in final focus.
Tech > Truth but the sky is still blue
Cases: Please don't run more than one counterplan (it just ruins your side)
Constructive: The neg must respond to the aff case or then I will consider the arguments dropped.
Rebbutals: Neg can't bring up new responses in the 2NR unless it's a response made in the 1AR. Also, I personally really hate it when teams bring up new evidence in the 2AR.
Value Premise: A value premise, in my opinion, should be a maximum of 3 words. I don't like when a team's value premise is an entire sentence. Also, it must connect to your case, or then I will assume the other persons' value premise.
Value Criterion: A value criterion must relate to the value premise. If not, then I will disregard the value premise and value criterion.