Mohan,+Smiti

I debated for Trinity Prep for four years on both the local and national circuits. I currently attend Georgetown University.


 * Arguments: **I default to a comparative evaluation of the round and prefer such debate. However, I am open to other forms of evaluation as well. The only thing I really detest is truth testing. I never understood it as a debater, and I still do not fully understand it now. When extending arguments, make sure to reiterate the claim, warrant, and impact. Otherwise arguments may be disregarded or not have as much value in the round as you would like.
 * Weighing: ** Please remember to weigh between arguments and impacts! Use a weighing standard or mechanism of some sort and tell me what it is.


 * Speed **: You can speak quickly, but if I cannot understand you or your words are jumbled that will be a problem. I'll say clear twice, maybe three times but then I'll drop my pen. If you're not loud enough, I will say loud a few times but if I keep on repeating myself and I still cannot hear you, I will drop my pen. My face will be another indicator if I can't understand you.


 * Theory **: Unless there is actual abuse in the round, I won't value theory very highly. That said I do enjoy a good theory debate so if there is abuse, feel free to run theory arguments. If there is no abuse and you engage in a theoretical debate, I will look down on you and your speaker points may suffer, but you can still win the round on a substantive level. Run arguments as a fully developed shell, and make sure to extend the shell fully with standards, links, and impacts.  I won't vote on RVIs but if you make a very very //very //strong case for it I may be convinced, but just don't do it if you want my vote.


 * <span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Critical Arguments: **<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> I am fine with plans, disads, counterplans, and K's although you need to explain them slowly and very well. I am not a fan of dense rhetoric in cards but I am fine with clever/different positions, as long as they are explained. I do not like a prioris or presumption arguments though and will be very less inclined to vote for them and you so it'd just be easier for everyone if you stayed away from them. If I have to vote for them for some reason, your speaks will probably suffer.


 * <span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Speaks **<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">: As long as you're not offensive (e.x. racial slurs, genocide good, etc), rude to both me and your opponent, and really disorganized and incomprehensible, your speaks will be fine. Unless you're amazing and blow my socks off, you probably won't get a 30 but my speaks average quite high so don't worry about it too much.

<span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;">Feel free to ask any questions before the round begins. If needed, I can elaborate on any of the above or answer more specific questions.