TLDR: Run whatever you want, I'll vote on the flow and whatever fw you want me to evaluate.

I am a Communication Studies graduate from CSULB. I competed for El Camino College in NPDA / IPDA / Limited Prep Speeches / Interps for 2 years. I am currently in my third year of coaching the Palos Verdes High School Speech and Debate team. If there are any questions or preferences let me know.

Communication: Communication with your partner in any manner is fine, but I will only flow whatever the present speaker says. Be respectful to your opponents and your partner.

Speed: I don't mind speed, just speak clearly and concisely. I won't call clear or slow because it's your time and you can use it however you want, but I may give nonverbals to indicate you are going too fast or are being unclear.

Kritiks: Kritiks should have a clear link to the resolution. Advocacies and their solvencies should be clearly explained. K's (esp on the aff) should have a very clear fw for evaluation, a K without fw is hard to evaluate. Run whatever K you want. I primarily ran anthro when I was competing so I may be a little more critical if thats what you run, but I don't pretend to be an expert or anything. Identity tix are cool and fun arguments that are beneficial to debate and individual agency, however, they can also easily be used to bully, silence, or provoke reactions from other teams when weaponized incorrectly. I won't tell you how to run identity arguments but know that it's somewhat of a grey area for me as far as voting.

Theory / Topicality: I'm open to a good T debate so long as it's properly structured (interp viol stds voters). I don't mind running shells just to kick them, but it's a very bad decision to collapse to a theory shell that is clearly just a time suck. Honestly open to any theory position, even jokey stuff as long as it's not bad, just don't run dumb stuff in the MO (I've seen new theory in the MO and it was a mess). MG theory is fine, should be fleshed out though. I'll default to competing interps but you should state that somewhere in the theory.

RVIS: I don't hate RVI's or IVI's but it's not the most compelling argument. If a team is reading 7 blipped out T shells and 3 blipped out specs then yeah run an RVI but other than that, all instances of spec T and other theory are not cause for debate collapse or abuse.

Signposting: Please have brief taglines for your arguments, I can't vote on an argument if I don't know what to call it, where it fits, or why it matters.

Timing: Time yourselves and time your opponents. I don't mind if you are slightly under or over time, but be sure to make sure it's not abusive. Call your opponents on time abuses if they are happening.