Ricci,+Eric

Hi everyone! I debated for North Allegheny for 4 years in LD, competing on both local and national circuits. My paradigm is pretty similar to Elysia Segal’s, so reference her paradigm for sure.

I’ll vote for anything as long as it’s warranted and I understand it. With that being said, my two favorite types of args are well-made phil cases and k’s. I’ll flow theory but if its blatantly frivolous I’ll have a high leeway for responses/I’ll default to reasonability. Oh also I hate 99% of aprioris (I hear they’re popular again—gross), please don’t run them in front of me unless you have a really good reason to.

Oh also I haven’t flowed or judged a fast round in like 8 months, so if you wanna spread tone it down to like 70% of your normal speed if you can, but it shouldn’t be a problem.

In the end, the way I see debate is that this is your unique discursive space to express yourself. If you run a well-warranted argument (that like isn’t racist/sexist/homophobic/etc), I’m willing to vote on it.

If you have any questions, feel free to email me at ericci@andrew.cmu.edu. Good luck