Katzman,+Marilyn

I debated in high school at Rowland Hall-St. Mark’s (apparently now just “Rowland Hall”?) and now debate at USC.


 * Overall **: I prefer that the aff read and defend an advocacy statement or plan that is in-line with the resolution. You can choose whatever rationale for your advocacy statement you like as long as you’re defending that the resolution, or a portion of it, is a good idea. I.e., it doesn’t matter whether you read traditional policy-type advantages or critical advantages, but I want them to relate to the topic.

Other than that, I’ll try not to hold any predispositions, and you should go for what you enjoy going for.


 * Theory **: I tend to default to rejecting the argument rather than the team, so if you’re banking on theory args, you’ll want to spend a generous amount of time explaining why ‘X’ arg or strategy made the debate irrecoverable for you.


 * T **: Tell me which framework you’d like me to evaluate it in (competing interps/reasonability).


 * Impact calculus **: Yes, please.