Ati,+Rohun

Since this question is asked a lot, **here are the arguments I prefer not to see:** micropolitics, performance, and irony. I won't penalize you on speaks if you go for these arguments anyway, but the ballot story will need to be incredibly compelling for me to vote on it.

I expect the aff to present an advocacy, and the neg to clash with that advocacy. I'll evaluate the round based on the arguments you make, and your explanation of why that means you win the round. How you do this (standards, framework, implicit post fiat utility, whatever) is up to you. You will likely end up with excellent speaks if you (1) do great evidence/analytic comparison, (2) do some solid weighing, and (3) lay out a coherent decision calculus. As long as you do these things, feel free to debate however is most comfortable for you.


 * Always slow down for tags and authors.** **I would say that I prefer a 7.5, but I have less difficulty flowing faster if the clarity is really superior.**

Questions - email me: ratijr@yahoo.com