Haque,Faraaz

I debated for Kempner High School and competed in all formats of debate specializing in LD and Policy debate clearing at many local and national circuit tournaments. Qualified for TFA State my last two years of high school, one time in Policy the other in LD. I now attend the University of Texas at Austin.

Short Version: I don't care about what you do just be coherent and efficient. I'll vote off anything as long as you give me a reason to do so. Speed is fine.

Pref Shortcut (I feel you, I wouldn't want to read anything either, I read everything except alot of theory) Framework/Phil: 1 LARP: 1-2 K: 2-3 Tricks: 2 Theory: 3

Long Version for you people who really care:


 * Speed**: If you want to go fast, start slow then gradually get faster so i can become accustomed to your speed. Slow down on tags/authors/theory interps.

**Framework/Phil**: These were predominantly the types of arguments I ran in LD so I understand a large variety of frameworks. Honestly, if done right, framework debates are probably the most fun to watch. I don't really care if you read a value, value criterion, or a ROB/ROJ. If you do something clever with your framework interaction, I will bless your speaks. That being said, I love an extremely well-done framework debate. If you do read a complex framework, take time to explain it please. In phil, I read mostly Kant, Nietzsche, Deleuze, Foucault, Douzinas, Util, and Skepticism. I'll evaluate Skep/Existentialism bc I read it alot in rounds, don't be dumb with it ie don't read it in front of an oppression framework.


 * K: ** These were the second most used arguments in my arsenal during my senior year. Although I read certain critical arguments my senior year, I am open to all critical arguments. If you don't know if I am familiar with a piece of literature, just assume I'm not and explain it thoroughly. Have a clear link story and I don't really care to what the alt is. Do whatever. Please have a framing mechanism in the K or at least tell me how the K functions in relation to all the other arguments in the round.


 * K Affs/Performances** : Go for it. I'm cool with evaluating them


 * Tricks: ** Love them. Be honest about it. I read alot of tricks my senior year and they are actually really fun to see. Justify your arguments.


 * Larp: ** I am totally cool with Plans/CPs/DAs. Slow down on tags and authors. Make weighing arguments obviously. Larp Debate is just evidence comparison and weighing so do those things.


 * Theory: ** I have a high threshold for theory used, but I do know that it is a legitimate strategy used in debate rounds often. That being said, please make sure there is actual abuse occurring in the round otherwise I will be disappointed. If the theory flow is too messy for my evaluation, I will most likely make a bad decision on theory. I default to whatever you tell me to. I don't have a stance on RVIs so I'll evaluate whatever you want me to. Don't read frivolous theory, also I do not care for disclosure that much unless the abuse story is very compelling.

**Misc:** -Don't be too offensive, but I enjoy jokes of all types. -Don't be overly rude to your opponent, but sarcasm is great sometimes -Make me laugh -If you have any other questions about this paradigm: ask questions or keep it to yourself idc. -if you do an email chain, put me on it: faraaz.haque@utexas.edu