Zerbib-Berda,+Nate

My name is Nate Zerbib-Berda, I debated in 2004 for Hopkins, MN. I have a B.A.in political science from George Washington and a J.D. from U of Minnesota. I currently am an assistant coach for the Harvard Westlake Debate team.

I'll vote for any argument. Your arguments should be logical, and contain a claim, warrant and impact. I believe that the Standard/Value Criterion is a scale used to weigh the round. Your case should have some sort of framework, either a VC, a burden, a syllogism, or any other method the debaters can use to weigh.

I will vote for policy arguments, but you should explain how these arguments function in the round. I generally don't vote on "presume aff" or "presume neg" arguments, I think both sides should have an equal chance to win the ballot and I shouldn't automatically prefer affs just because there might be a time skew.

I have never voted for skepticism.

I am fine with any level of speed but you must be coherent.

For theory I default to reasonability and believe there should be some form of abuse in the round. I default to comparative worlds over truth testing, but will accept truth testing arguments.

Your job is to tell me how and why I should vote for you, many of my decisions end up being influenced heavily by crystallization. If you tell a clear ballot story you are at a significant advantage. Comparative weighing is also very important to me, if you want to win the round you should discuss your opponents arguments and explain why you outweigh.

Your speaks will be dropped heavily if I think you are being disrespectful in any way. I also reserve the right to drop debaters that make arguments that are offensive or morally repugnant on face.