General Notes: I believe that my role as the judge is to absorb the information provided within the round and decide who wins based on the debater's ability to explain and defend their positions. Do whatever you were going to do before you saw my name on the pairing. 

I mostly ran kritical arguments during my time as a debater. In my earlier years, I also did traditional policy but most of my experience is with the K. That said, I frequently vote on traditional policy argumentation against the K, at least in part because my threshold for explanation/"proof" of kritical arguments is slightly higher than some other judges.

Pet Peeves and other things -

In-Round Discourse: Don't be a jerk. It's alright to be aggressive, but if so, there should be a point behind it. At it's core, I actually believe that debate is a game, so don't go out of your way to make it unenjoyable unless there is a good reason. Yes, I will dock speaker points if I think you're unnecessarily out-of-pocket.

Time - I don't keep track of time well in my personal life or in debates. Please don't rely on me for that. Keep track of your own and your opponent's time.

E-mail Chain - Yeah, put me on it: itlowery20@gmail.com