Alamgir,+Ashab

6/27/12  you can cut down on your case args and focus more on offcase work on being a little more clear. work on clarity, and then speed good job responding in CX 6/28/12 In reading the 1AC, please SLOW DOWN when you are reading CITES. I didn't catch many of the author names/dates you are reading. Your speed is okay, but a higher volume would totally help. When you are making evidence comparisons, try to give a more thorough analysis of why I predict your authors over the NC. It's not enough to tell me that your author is a professor and so should be preferred over the Neg authors; I need to here who the Neg authors are and THEN why qualifications gives me a reason to prefer.  7/1/12  Judge: Lucas Smith (lucaswbsmith@gmail.com) General Comments: Everybody in this round needs to work on a) flowing and b) clash. I never really felt like at any point anyone had a good flow of the round. Given how green you all are its o.k. But it is something you are going to have to work on. Clash was another problem. Perhaps this is a flowing problem, but its really important that you compare and weigh each argument. What does it matter if states have better local knowledge? Who cares about waste? Etc. NEG: The 2NR needs to focus on one strategy. If you are going for the CP, its not that important to win defense on advantage you say you solve. So just focus on the reason why the USFG would fail. Go for the fism net benefit or the budget da. Follow the line-by-line. Read your case arguments on case.
 * note on highlighting: the point of highlighting is to read less than the underline. It defeats the purpose to just highlight the underlined parts of the card.