Klish,+Nathan

Things to know about me: 1) I like arguments that make sense - they don't necessarily have to be tied to a card, smart analytics are often times better than reading cards that say functionally the same thing. 2) Politics disadvantages are awesome and I think knowing about the current political climate is a good thing. 3) Be extra clear (not necessarily slower, but wouldn't necessarily hurt) on theory/T debates - more clear development of args will help my flow and your results. 4) Kritiks that have a clear explanation of how the alt/links interact with the aff is going to be the surest way of getting my ballot - the more specific interaction the better. Generic K things are boring. 5) Be a good person - light humor, jokes, and general friendliness will boost speaks. Don't be an asshole. Elitism is my least favorite thing ever. Compassion is not a finite resource. 6) I don't coach and I don't judge a lot so I probably know nothing about the topic - explain things please.

My views of "traditional" debate vs. "non-traditional" debate: I'm pretty easy going these days, my general feeling is that debate is a game and people do it because people find that it's a good thing to do - there's probably some common ground somewhere. When I debated, I read mostly policy-style arguments, but I think non-policy-style arguments are also really cool and make debate more textured in terms of people, ideas, etc. I think the best way to get my ballot is to be upfront about debate being a competitive activity, and basing arguments in that - e.g. exploiting debate as a game is good because winning legitimizes our argument or competition incentivizes smarter arguments, or addressing the competitive nature of debate in some way.