I believe my function is to determine which team has presented and defended the better public policy option.
Topicality is a voting issue.
I cannot be persuaded to the contrary. The affirmative must be within the language of the resolution, and field contextual definitions are the best way to establish what that language means. I will vote on Presumption if there is no other way to resolve the round. But, in all my years in policy debate, I do not believe I have ever done so. I will read cards after the round, but as few as possible and not if they were incomprehensible when first read.