Tariq,+Amna

School Affiliation: University High School Experience: High School Policy Debate Four Years

I cannot believe I finally get to do this So let's have fun and make this year a year to miss! But here are some pointers in what makes up my debate bliss:

1. Depth Over Breath: I seem to favor now smaller and contained affirmative and negative positions this means for the affirmative that I would rather look at a few advantages that are well developed and mesh together well, then a bunch of random "picked out of a hat" impacts. Negative, I like well put together 1nc's that seem to have a strategy, not just what you can spew out the fastest, but if that is your strategy to overwhelm the other team then go ahead, atleast let your arguments have some cohesion together.

2. Evidence: There's many of nth rounds where I have lost to a team with "better" evidence, even though I didn't even the realize the evidence was read until the 2nr/2ar where the other team would even mention. This means I want clear extensions of evidence from the beginning, yes the quality of the evidence is important but I'm more inclined to look to a team that is pulling out warrants, and doing the better cross applications with slightly inadequate evidence than the team that is just soley relying on their "great evidence."

3. Speed/Clarity: I love speed! I think it's what distinguishes policy debate, from all other activities, it's simply beautiful. Good speed that is, even though I appreciate speed, I think that if you wish to go more slower than that's just fine. I find speed to be a form of persuasion, there can be passion found in between the lines of the 60 words a minute.

Remember I didn't tell you what to run, or how to run these are just dispositions to look out for:

D/A's- I like to hear developed disads with solid internal links, not just aff causes this and we all die. Trust me Sarah Palin will be able to locate Iraq on a map before that impact scenario ever happens. Politcs are awesome, and a great way to gain offense on the case, because it's what current so timeframe/impact analysis is very important here. In general I like strong impact analysis, make logical arguments on how a leads to be that leads to c, and this is why it matters.

K's- Ironically, even though I've spent the last two years in the k world, running k aff's I still very much get why some judges nowadays are starting to turn their nose up at the K. The link story is very important, and so is me knowing what the name of the k is. (sidenote) I need to know why it matters, and why in that round specifically matters for you to get my ballot. Framework is also very good, I think it adds depth to the whole k debate, but don't just get bogged down on framework dealing with the actual k matters.

T/Theory- Maybe it was because I was the 2a most of my life.... I seem to sympathize with my fellow 2ac'ers, on this but I tend to err aff on conditionality debates, not that I can't be convinced otherwise, I am very easy to convince with just a little more "upmph"? But the best theory debate I ever saw, was when the other team actually answered each one of the subpoints and then proceeded to read his block, I thought that was a very smart move. T in general right now, is very strategic, and I love good T debates, I am technical when it comes to T but I have no predisposition of competing interpretations versus reasonability.

I've come to realize that I'm not a funny person, in debate.. so don't worry you don't have to be, you just have to be willing to try your best, and at least give off the impression that you know what you are talking about that will be alright with be. Debate it 99% confidence, 1% intellect and skill, even though I think it should be even, I will listen to you if you look like you really want to debate. :)