I vote as a policy maker. I handle both Circuit and Classic (stock) style debate arguments.

Burden of proof for all forms of debate. Because the AFF has the burden of proof of presenting a prima facie case, so too the NEG has the burden of proof when presenting its case. For example, if the NEG argues a Kritik without providing an alternative, it has failed, in the classic sense, to meet its burden of proof and I have the ability as a judge to mark down the argument as carrying little weight, especially if the AFF identifies the lack of a plan or alternative. A NEG Kritik without an alternative is nothing more than a non-unique disadvantage that exists in both the AFF and NEG world. To that end, the same goes with the AFF in terms of its failure to provide a Plan Text and Inherency if it is running an AFF K.