Barwani,+Shehzad

Name: Shehzad Bharwani

I debated in LD for 3 years at Grapevine High School in the local, state, and national circuits. I currently attend Emory University.

Debate is a medium of expression and you are responsible to get your idea across. That being said, I am pretty open-minded and appreciate creativity.

I see the resolution as a truth statement. The affirmative has the burden to prove the resolution true and the negative to prove the resolution not true. I will default to evaluate the round based on the evaluative mechanism given (standard, criterion, burdens, multiple standards, etc) through which we view the resolution. If nothing else, I will vote for the person who supports their evaluative mechanism the best (this is bare minimum). If you do not have a standard you need to explain why it is not necessary.

I will prefer arguments that are substantively warranted and well developed that are able to impact back to the evaluative mechanism. I appreciate comparative analysis such as weighing the impacts to the evaluative mechanism provided.

Speed: I am decent at flowing but my accuracy is dependent on your clarity. However, I will warn you. If you are known for being “too fast” or “very fast” I suggest you slow down for me. If you are being unclear, I will literally look at you and say “clearer” to each debater only ONCE.

Theory: I do not like theory. However, I do believe in it to check abuse in a round and I will end up voting on it if I feel that it is really justified and well developed.

Critical Arguments: Like I said, I like creativity especially if it is thorough, clear, and your stance is explicit.

If you are planning to use some particular school of philosophy, (pomo, biopower, etc) make sure you do not make any assumptions about me or your opponent understanding the concepts. Make sure you are clear and comprehensive in your explanation, presentation, and application to the resolution.

Speaks usually range from 27-30. I base speaker points on arguments and analysis provided not necessarily on speaking style. However, if your speaking style is blatantly disrupting the articulation of your argument I might dock you.

Please slow down and articulate your author names. This will be necessary if you are going to refer back to them later in the round and you want me to understand what you are talking about.

I think that humor in debate is a lost art and making me laugh in the round will work in your favor unless it is at the expense of your opponent. If you are being an asshole to your opponent I will dock you significantly.

Please feel free to ask me any questions prior to the round. I’m also fine with questions after the round but I’m not ok with rudeness.

Lastly, remember that debate is a game so have fun. .