Shehab,+Ghada

ghadashehab321@gmail.com (Start an email chain right away please)

FOR LD: Basically, I'm familiar with most progressive/traditional arguments. So feel free to run whatever you want.

If you have questions, please ask before round.

I hate **theory**, so much. It is overused and un-educational and most theories that LD'ers read are basically unfair and have no real impact in the debate round. It is NOT unlikely that I will vote you up on theory, it should just be a rather good one for me to vote on. But if you will read some theory that you think is vital to the round, then break it down and tell me why its a voting issue. I don't do RVIs. Counter-interp's are better than "we-meet". But go about it whatever way you want. >>I feel very strongly about calling your opponent a "cheater". I think there are better ways/words to show that you are being put at a disadvantage during the debate round.

-If the AFF gives the NEG a burden. You either refute it, or work under it. If you drop it, you're dropped.

-BUT Some dropped arguments are honestly useless for the whole picture of the debate. Just because you extended a dropped argument that does nothing for you doesn't mean I'll vote it up.

**Topicality** is also fine and I will evaluate it first if I think your opponent is being unfair. I do strongly believe that for fair engagement inside of the debate space, the affirmative should be somewhat topical. However, this is up to you to convince me how to vote off of that. I can vote you up if you're untopical, but you have to convince me why your method is superior and how you aren't harming your opponent.

**K's** are great. I'm familiar with most of the K's circulating around, and with a lot of the literature of K's. But if you're going to be reading something out of the ordinary, articulate and explain it to me. (I will say this; however, most people that run structural violence K's tend to group minorities in hierarchies and solve for the "most oppressed"; this strategy is wrong and offensive).

**K affs** are also fine, just make sure you're actually resolving what you're kritiking even if its through in-round discourse. Something isn't simply bad because it is.

Philosophical arguments are also very cool. I love **Philosophy.** However, you will need to explain it to me if its out of the ordinary.

**Traditional LD** is also awesome. If you're going to do Traditional LD, then i'll put a little emphasis on the V/VC debate. I love good framework debates! I hate cross-benefit/cost-benefit analysis frameworks, if you do read that, just know i'm disappointed.

**SPEED** - Speed is fine, BUT taglines, plan texts and/or advocacies should always be conversation speed. If I don't hear it, i won't flow it. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">**Intensity** is fine, just don't be rude. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">**Speaker Points** - I never give 26 or lower, if I do, you're super offensive and/or rude. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">& Always give **voters.**

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-If you wanna transfer CX time to prep; go for it. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-I've seen a few **performance** cases and I loved them, if that's what you do, go for it. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Cross-Ex is hella important. If you make a good point in CX, just bring it up in your speech <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-I call for evidence a lot.

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-__**If I don't understand something, you will know from my face expressions. I will expect you to explain it to me if you notice that I don't understand your argument. I can't vote on something that doesn't make sense to me.**__

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Males talking over Females in CX is a pet peeve of mine. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Being a Male and being over-aggressive to your female opponent will earn you a 25 or lower. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-If you're White and reading Wilderson or other heavily non-White ontology based arguments; I'll be disappointed. I will vote you down, if your opponent brings that up in their speech. It'll be an automatic vote for them. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Knowing that your opponent is traditional and then reading like 2 K's or 8 off is also non-educational and unhelpful. A good debater knows how to adjust and win off of that. I'm not saying I won't vote off of it, I'm just saying its unproductive inside of the given debate space. <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-K's with no alts aren't K's.. Seriously.
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Things I hate: **

<span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Educational Rounds <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Reading arguments you care about <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Having fun and being yourself <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Engaging rather than disengaging <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Humor <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">-Kanye West jokes
 * <span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">Things I'd like to see: **