Royal,+Victoria

I am primarily concerned with the rhetorical and logical qualities of each argument. Good evidence alone will not win a round; only good arguments with good evidence will persuade me. I am looking for a holistic understanding of the topic and consequences of taking both positions--strawman and red herrings will get you nowhere. I know you all wrote cases for each position, so you ought to have remarkable criticisms of each side since you've prepared to defend both sides. The best debater will concede to certain excellent points made by their opponent while simultaneously showing me that those points in reality undermine their opponent's case and ultimately support their own. Please explain all acronyms, including debate lingo!!! I prefer arguments that are collegiate and poetic rather than frenetic, maudlin or braggadocios. The best debaters learn from each round and modify their cases according to their new knowledge. That being said, utilitarianism is a wretched thing. I will only tolerate "spreading" as long as you are intelligible and not ridiculous.