Palani,+Prabhu

This is my first time judging on this topic. I AM A LAY JUDGE. I do not follow spreading - speak like you would in real life. If I don't understand you, you will lose. I use the stock issues paradigm. The aff must win all five stock issues to win, but the neg need win only one to win the round. I prefer a 1ac divided into stock issues over one with advantages.

1) Topicality: This is a lay round - if the aff is topical, don't run T as a timesuck. I won't be impressed. If it's logical and you can show why it's unfair for them to read the aff, I will vote on T.

Harms: What are the problems in the status quo?

Inherency: Are steps being taken in the status quo to solve the harms?

Solvency: How does your plan specifically solve the harms?

Disadvantage: I am aware that there are generic disadvantages such as the politics DA. I will tell you that I am not at all familiar with them; however, I am more than happy to judge a debate with a disadvantage that makes logical sense and is backed by evidence. Do not use jargon such as uniqueness, internal link, and link because I will not understand that. The Disadvantage must outweigh the case.

No Kritiks, no CP's, no theory.

Keep it slow, logical, and interesting. Make sure you make strong analytics and compare evidence. I will do my best to vote on argumentation alone as I do keep a flow; however, debate is a game of persuasion and that may very well make up my decision.

Feel free to ask me any questions before the round begins. Let me repeat: I AM A LAY JUDGE.