I typically can't hear/follow full speed spreading. If I can't hear you I will yell clear.

I will listen to any arguments I understand. If you are running progressive arguments I expect clear explanations for every part of the case. You can read tricky arguments but if I can't hear them I will not vote on them.

Traditional approach is probably best.

I value tech over truth, once again as long as the argument is explained to me.

During rebuttals I expect clear, heavy impact work. Explain how your arguments interact with theirs and tell me why to vote for you.

I'm very simple. I debated in the NFL to a quad ruby in LD/HI 20+ years ago. I like clear and concise information that pushes arguments along. I don't need to be told the same thing twice.

I am a lay judge and I prefer no spreading.