__Wiesner,+Kevin__

I'm most interested in the framework that the debaters want me to use to evaluate the round. Absent any framework debate in the round, my default decision-making paradigm is to evaluate the round through a policy-making lens. (i.e. I'll weigh the affirmative against the negative policy option). Remember the whole idea is debate is supposed to be fun; don't be mean, and try to relax.

Clash is probably more important to T and theory than any other part of the debate. Often T and theory come down to competing interpretations and which interpretation has better access to the standards debate.
 * T/ theory**

Impact calculus is crucial here. Disads and case is a nice old-fashioned strategy for winning rounds.
 * Disads**

I'm willing to vote on a K that the debaters can adequately explain. If you want to win a K debate it is not very effective to use a bunch of giant words to try to sound smart. A much better K debate would be explaining which assumptions of the affirmative (or negative) are insidious and how those specific assumptions lead to the implication of the K. I find performative contradiction arguments very compelling, so if you decide to run a K I would suggest having a consistent advocacy across flows. If you're doing some sort of project I'm going to need offense against voting for the other team aside from it's not voting for you.
 * K**

I'll vote on all types of Counterplans so long as the negative can defend the theoretical legitimacy of them from affirmative theory arguments.
 * CPs**

Like every other judge, I do not like when teams use time for flashing speeches to steal prep. If I catch a team stealing prep during flash time I will take that time out of prep. Since I was not timing this prep stealing, I will estimate how much time was stolen. I will err on the side of more prep time used than less, so stealing is probably not to your advantage. My observation of where I see the most prep being stolen is before the 2NC. 1N's are most likely to steal prep here because they are focused on their own speech.
 * Paperless**