Kyagaba,+Ivan

About Me: I debated for four years in high school at Canton Central Catholic (CCC). I experienced a decent amount of success. I broke to elimination rounds at just about every national tournament we attend from my sophomore year of high school, until the end of my high school debate career. I have won speaker awards at numerous tournaments, and would consider myself very competent in most areas of debate. I am now a member of the George Mason Debate team.

As far as what arguments I prefer, I would like to think I am as unbiased as possible. I debated the k heavily, but also ran consult and politics. So whatever you want to do, do it. Just debate it to the best of your ability. But as far as specifics...

Theory: I'm more likely to think that Consults CP's are probably abusive, Sunsets, Offsets, and all the "cheto" cp's are. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean you can not read them in front of me. It just means that if it is close, I will most likely err aff on those issues. But if you debate it well enough (neg), then you will not have a problem with me. I also will not vote on cheap theory. Just because the 1ar didn't answer your argument, it does not mean that they automatically lost the round. They might be in a world of hurt, but do not stand up in the 2nr and tell me I should vote for you solely because your theoretical objection was not answered. Just like any other argument, I want to see some sort of impact. How it makes it harder for you to debate. Some sort of abuse story. But I definitely think theory is a very strategic weapon that should be in every round

Kritik: I ran the kritik a lot in high school. I would like nothing more than a great k round. But this does not mean you should read the k in front of me. In general, I don't really think you need an alternative to win, or framework. But it also depends on how you are running your criticism and your strategy. That is up to you to determine. But as far as I'm concerned, I am probably one of the more k friendly judges

DA's: Debate them well. When I say that I mean; make smart decisions in the block. Collapse down, realize what you are LOSING and make smart 2nr decisions, and reading updated uniqueness will help your speaker points. I will vote on defensive arguments. If there is no risk of your impact, then no matter how great your link story is, I will not vote neg. I feel impact calculus is probably the most important thing to do in front of me. Not just impact calc, but comparative analysis as to why your timeframe, prob, and magnitude really do supersede the other teams.

CP's: I am open to any cp. I read consult more towards the end of my high school career, so I have no bias as far as hearing them. HOWEVER, like said before, I do think most "cheto" cp's are not legit. Which means, be prepared to debate theory well (neg) or the result may not go your way in a close round. But that doesn't mean the aff can just say consult, conditions etc are not legit and I will vote for them. I think it is probably wise to have a net benefit to your cp, one that can be external offense in case things do not go as planned. I don't see me voting for a cp without a net benefit.

Topicality: I debated topicality a lot in high school. I have experience running untopical affs, and reading it on the neg. I am pretty unbiased when it comes to T. A lot of people say that T should not be a strategy, but I disagree. If you have come up with a GOOD and SENSICAL T argument, by all means run it in front of me. If you as an affirmative are not topical, it also does not mean you are doomed. Kritik's of T are fine with me, but you have a bit of work to do. Convince me that T is actually abusive, and do not just stand up and talk about how you are being silenced. T is probably a good limiting factor in the debate community

JUST HAVE FUN! Often times you forget about that in HS debate. It is an activity that should be fun. Have presence, but BE NICE! DO NOT BE AN ASS. You will lose speaker points very quickly. Gender, race, sexual orientation, religion etc and all other discriminatory language will cause your points to suffer DRASTICALLY. Also, tag team c-x is fine, but if it gets excessive, I will warn you about it before you are penalized. Debate how you want to debate, and I will do my best to arbitrate the round as objectively as possible.