Mollison,+James

 I've done policy debate for 7 years and now currently debate for Loyola Marymount University (Ca). Here;s some stuff that describes me:

am easily annoyed, not easily offended.

Tabula Rasa with the following exceptions and clarifications:

firstly, Tabula Rasa should be taken to heart. I have no palatability for dumb arguments, but am willing to vote on absolutely anything if argued well (T bad; plan-plan good; surrealism good; even politics)

secondly, while I do believe in a 0% risk of a link, I am inclined to default to an offense-defense paradigm to clean up a bad debate.

thirdly, my personal preference for 'critical' literature probably makes me more likely to notice and be annoyed with poor bastardization of good authors.

lastly, perm do the alternative is not an argument (unless you're gonig for plagarism good, or hijacking good, et cetera)