Galerstein,+Robert

Robert Galerstein Dunwoody High School 2012 University of Georgia 2016

I'm a freshman debater at UGA. I'm very technical and have no real prejudices toward any argument type. Please just do what you are best at, although I have particular leanings, I will listen and vote on whatever (to a certain extent).

General Preferences

1. I don't think you need evidence to win an argument. 2. I'm willing to vote on zero risk of a disad or advantage. 3. I won't read evidence unless its' contents are contested or the debating on the issue is close. 4. I won't consider anything until the 2NR (and sometimes 2AR...) "new" unless I'm told otherwise. 5. Impact calculus and turns case, in arguing and answering, is VERY important from both sides. 6. Although a dropped arg is definitely true, that doesn’t automatically win you the debate. 7. If you are unclear, I probably won't flow you, but it should be pretty obvious. 8. I evaluate everything in terms of offense-defense unless told otherwise (and no, that doesn't contradict #2). 9. Qualifications are nice, if they’re brought up (and implicated).

Specific Preferences

1. I default to competing interpretations but can be swayed towards a reasonable counter-interpretation (key word counter-interpretation). 2. I don't have a predisposition for kicking an advocacy as a judge and will generally default to the last time the issue is spoken to (even if that's 1NC CX). 3. I think most theoretical counter-interpretations (from the aff) are self-serving and illegitimate -- just debate whether the given practice is good or bad. 4. Most kritik alternatives need to be more concrete; links should definitely reference specific assumptions to the plan that the mutually exclusive alt' is able to resolve. This should be thoroughly explained/investigated on both sides. 5. Permutations beg the question of what constitutes competition and more importantly whether that means of competition is legitimate – this is true for both kritiks and CP's. 6. Presumption is with less change and can go either way. 7. Framework is an alright strategy vs. many K aff's, but actually engaging their argument (through K's, PIK's, etc) is normally more strategic and interesting.