Thakore,+Kal

Kal Thakore Senior Alpharetta High School Debated 4 years brah

Quick Read: I like everything, make sure I know what the argument is though. Speed is fine, be clear though. Don't be mean, debate is supposed to be a fun and educational activity, being an outright jerk kills the fun. More is found below the fold:

UPDATED 3/18/13

T- I tend to defer to competing interpretations over Reasonability, but can be easily persuaded to vote for it. I feel that t debates should be more centered on what has actually happened in the round to prove potential abuse. That being said, I feel that most affs this year are effectually topical to a certain extent. I like aff's that push the limits of the resolution (like fund roads in the US but put them in another Country not related to the US). I would love to see a well developed T debate on these issues. I would also love to see an aff that is executed in this sense. ( <-- I don't think that made any sense but I hope you get the jist of what I am saying)

CP'S- I'm fine with them. PICS are probably abusive, and international fiat is pretty good, but it doesn't mean I can't be persuaded otherwise. Gotta prove competition on the CP though: immediacy is stupid :D. Normal means CP's are up for an interesting debate.

DA's- These debates need to be centered around the impact Calculus. That being said, I want comparative impact calculuses (<is that even a word... maybe calculi?). Not just one team saying that their impact is bigger and faster, but why the other's probably won't result in extinction, etc and why its not probable/its slow as a turtle. Debates have withered away from these debates and are just teams extending certain arguments. WHY DO THEY MATTER? Gotta tell me, I won't do that work for you in evaluating a debate.

K's- I LIEK K'ZZ. I go for them a lot and pretty well versed on the lit. Make sure I can understand what you are saying though, if its an obscure K of some sort (ahem baudrillard ahem). That doesn't mean that I won't vote for the affirmative. In fact, the 4 K debates I have judged this year have all been aff ballots. If you win framework, probably means i'll vote for you. If the aff wins the perm, I'll probably vote for them, etc. Also, K debates have withered away from case debates. K+Case debates are important especially this year when you got ASTEROIDS comin to get us. Gotta answer the case. Also, something that is becoming less valued is specific links to the aff. Not reading cards that say that X aff is capitalist, but finding lines in their 1Ac evidence that point to the fact that the plan is capitalist. Things like that, I like.

K affs- They are ok. Be specific in cx, cuz I nor the neg know what the aff probably is coming out of the 1AC. Be responsive to arguments that fit under your methodology/framework and those that don't. Don't be a moving target though. I am persuaded by framework arguments the neg makes against these affs, especially the Predictability and Fairness claims, but that doesn't mean I won't evaluate anything the aff says. I have judged 2 K aff rounds this year, both were aff ballots when the 2NR was Framework, if that serves as any "motivation".

Performance: ... Seems interesting. Like I said above, make sure I know what is going on.

Theory: Condo is pretty good: with that being said, I have gone for Condo is bad many times and can be persuaded to vote aff. 2 conditional advocacies are my 'limit'.

International Fiat is pretty aight: Don't push the barriers and have like UGANDA do the plan, you need a good solvency advocate for the CP.

FINAL META ISSUE THING: Debate is an activity in which people all people enjoy. Please be nice, don't ruin the fun. Being aggressive in Cross-Ex is fine, trust me, I'm really aggressive in cross-ex. But don't be snarky 24/7 throughout the round. Your speaker points will affect this if you are. So don't.