Gopal,+Raj

I debated at Pennsbury High School from 2005-2009, both locally and nationally. I'm cool with speed for the most part. I just ask that you enunciate and slow down on tags/theory. I'll say "clear" if it sounds like you have marbles in your mouth. At the end of the round, I only look at the flow, and I strictly enforce dropped/unextended arguments. I like internal logic and consistency in cases/arguments, and I prefer a smart analytic to an unwarranted, illogical card. I don't really like the offense/defense paradigm. Good defense can mitigate or take out an impact. Onto specific thresholds and preferences:

Topicality—I like T and I'll vote on potential abuse, in-round abuse, or whatever voters you want. It all depends on who does a better job at impacting and contextualizing the round. If no one brings up Reasonability/Competing Interpretations, I default to Competing Interpretations as my framework for evaluating T. I don't like RVI's, Kritiks of T, or ASPEC/OSPEC.

Stock Issues—Good case debates have unfortunately become rare. I wish negs would at least put some defense on the case more often. I'll listen to Minor Repair and the like.

Disads—I really like in-depth internal link debates. I'll listen to pretty much any impact you put on a DA as long as the story is consistent. Politics DAs are fine. Please give me comparative impact analysis instead of just saying your impact is "inevitable."

Counterplans—Fine with almost anything here. I prefer specific and predictive solvency advocates for CPs.

Theory—Not huge on it, but mostly because few teams impact the debate effectively. If you can go beyond reading blippy shells and make arguments specific to the round I'll listen. Delay/consult CPs are sketchy but I won't automatically do the work for you on theory.

Kritiks—Having debated in Pennsylvania, I don't like Ks, but I'm willing to listen if you run the K logically and clearly. Make sure you really understand it and can explain it well without using buzzwords or just rereading your tags. Also, make sure you can explain how the aff specifically links to the K and go in-depth on the impact. Alternatives need to be a specific and clearly-explained action and need to be compared to the case. No Timecube, Acronyms Bad, Cards Bad, etc.

And please be reasonably civil. Debate's supposed to be fun.