Straus,+Daniel

Daniel Straus (10-11) Affiliation: **Columbia University**. Constrained against **Whitman College** and **Yorktown High School** in Arlington, Virginia.

I have never judged before but I think this what you should know about me:

Topicality - I am sympathetic to AFFs that try to be topical. Meaning you're probably alright if you meet a predictable/educational interpretation of the topic. That being said if you are not trying to be topical (no plan text, aff is metaphorically topical, impact turning t, or RVIs) I probably won't be very sympathetic.

Disads - I can be convinced that low risk is no risk. Smart defense, even without evidence, can get you a long way.

Counterplans - I am in the text + functional competition camp. A well argued perm can beat both consult cps and word pics. I also can be convinced that CPs that link less are still sufficient to trigger the net benefit. Also, bad perms/cps are reasons to reject the argument not the team.

Critiques - I never went for a critique and I only thought about beating them while I was debating. Unless you're reading queer theory or post-structuralists that are popular with historians I probably won't know what you're talking about. I'll try to judge fairly but you should realize that framework/role of the ballot arguments are never going to convince me not to evaluate the hypothetical enactment of the plan. You will almost certainly lose if you don't have an alternative. Policy teams, winning framework will probably not convince me to not evaluate the critique or alternative.

Performance - AFFs have to convince me that they are predictable enough that the negative team should have prepared to debate you after reading the resolution. If you want to get away with not reading a topical AFF you have to tell me what topic related predictable ground the negative has in addition to why you're framework is desirable. If you are negative you need to tell me why you're framework is a good idea and contextualize your arguments to the AFF. Tell me why your argument is competitive/links/ows.

Two other things, 1) don't make anti-Semitic jokes and 2) I don't like conditionality...