Singh,Karman


 * Updated 12/1/17 **

Update: All the things below are still true. Just start a bit slower and don't assume I know the topic lit or what's happening in debate. Also I don't like when both debaters just read a bunch of cards and do no weighing-don't be a robot. My email is sironthree AT gmail.com. If you sit down early I'll give higher speaks.

__ Pref Shortcuts (1 = best): __ LARP/Stock: 1 K: 3 Framework: 4 Theory: 1 Tricks: 2 Generic: 2


 * Conflicts: **Cy-Falls


 * Background ** : I am a sophomore at UT and I did LD for Cypress Falls High School in Houston, TX for 4 years and I now attend UT studying business. I competed on the local and national circuit and broke at TFA for 3 years and got a bid my junior year. I was also coached by Amyn Kassam and Arun Sharma.


 * General Philosophy:** I think debate is a good space to be creative and strategic. I will listen to all arguments because I think students should have a space to be creative with their thoughts. I think debate is important because it teaches us skills we can use the rest of our lives. That being said I do have some caveats on what arguments I prefer/more comfortable adjudicating.


 * Speed: ** Speed is fine. I will say clear up to two times before speaks are affected. I would prefer if you start of slow and get progressively faster so I can get used to flowing you. Slow down on tags/authors/interps/blocks of analytics .If I don’t flow it I won’t’ vote on it. Also, if an argument is particularly important to you, you should probably slow down on it. **Emailing the speech doc is not an excuse for you to be unclear.**


 * Theory/T: ** I default competing interpretations and drop the argument, obviously these can change depending on the arguments made in the round. Nuanced voters are a good thing. I like them. You should explicitly define what they are and why they’re important. You shouldn’t presume I know what they are. I don’t presume fairness is important so you should justify those things. This also means I’ll listen to arguments like fairness is not a voter. However, shitty arguments are shitty arguments and I give a lot of leeway to answering general dumps. I will vote on any interp or shell but think that the best theory debates come from nuanced and well crafted shells. I’m predisposed to thinking the aff gets an RVI in most situations but will obviously listen to arguments in the round.

*I think that theory debates, executed well, can be one of the most challenging and enjoyable parts of debate but alot of theory debates are just blippy and really bad.


 * Plans/CP’s/DA’s ** : These are fine and I ran these primarily my senior year. I like plan texts to be read a bit slower. You don’t have to extend them in later speeches. I know what you’re advocacy is. I enjoy util/policymaking debates but if you don't do any weighing in the round it will definitely hurt your speaks. Also it's really annoying when both sides just read a shit ton of evidence and do no evidence comparison.


 * Critical Arguments: ** You should slow down because some of the lit is confusing. If I don’t understand I won’t vote on it. If you don’t understand what you’re saying I won’t vote on it and I’ll dock speaks. Don’t presume I know anything. The more specific your links are the better the criticism is. If your alt isn't vague or just reject the aff that would be nice. As a fair warning, just because my two coaches were K debaters in high school this does not mean you should presume that I will understand what you are reading/give more credence to these types of arguments.

- Weigh arguments. People don’t weigh. Good weighing in front me will net you higher speaks and increase your chances of winning. - Don’t presume I know anything. You should be explaining terms to me. I’m not doing that work for you - Extend the claim and impact if an arg is dropped. Signpost effectively or I won’t flow effectively. I'm pretty lenient on extensions. -I ** like it when debaters make analytic arguments. Please look up from your laptops, look at me, and actually make arguments that have not been pre-written for you. Probably the best way you can get high speaks. ** - If you disclose full text on the wiki tell me after the round and I will give some extra speaks. I like disclosure.
 * Other General Things: **
 * - **Overviews are amazing. They give you the ability to collapses layers, pre-empt arguments, and write the ballot for me. I like it when debaters write the ballot for me. If you can effectively do this, you'll most likely win and get very high speaks

If you have any questions you can fb or find me at the tournament. Good Luck!