Ahmed,+Jamil

I debated for University High School (JUDL) for 4 years, competed nationally.

Mutual respect is obviously important for all debaters. If you display a bad attitude it will be reflected negatively towards your speaker points, but if you can display humor or entertainment it will be reflected positively towards your speaker points.

I have not been judging much this year, so I will not be familiar with the literature. Reading tags clearly, numbering arguments, and transitioning well are all crucial to keeping the flow neat and organized.

I like policy making, where there is a plan text and the resolution has meaning but I am open to critical debates as long as the Negative is indicting the specific acts/speech/arguments of the Affirmative. Also, impacts are forgotten a lot in K debates. Instead of just yelling genocide or dehumanization, you have to explain the internal links and the story of the impact.

T and theory debates are always fun but they usually get bogged down with pre-written blocks and hardly ever clash. If debaters aren’t effectively responsive on these flows they will not be given much weight. Additionally, negative has to approve real abuse and the best way to do that is to point out specific instances.

I am not a hack of any type of arguments, so I’ll hear what you have to say as long as you can debate it effectively. I’m generally tabula rasa, so enjoy yourself and be persuasive.