Pai,+Athma


 * Experience/Background:**

I debated LD for four years in high school (Connecticut and the nearby college tournament circuit) between 1999 and 2003. Additionally, as a college undergraduate, I judged two more years of HS policy debate at college tournaments in Connecticut and Pennsylvania. However, I have participated in any debate rounds since 2005 and so I am very out rusty on minutia and lingo. I am currently a postdoctoral researcher in Biology at MIT.

I prefer not to intervene or have to interpret your arguments in any way - it is your job to carry forward arguments and persuade me of your argument. This includes telling me how to vote at the end of the round and why I should vote that way, referencing elements from the round. I'm ok with letting the debate take it's course in terms of which argument ends up being the decision point, but try not to take it too far afield.
 * Philosophy:**

- I will flow to keep my own mind centered, but will only judge on the flow if neither team tells me how to vote - Dropped arguments won't be carried forward on my flow (mentioning something once is not going to persuade me), it's your job to carry them forward! - Along the same lines, make sure you continue to summarize your contention of your opponent's arguments during rebuttal, rather than assume that I will remember your points and only reiterate your own arguments - I do not judge cross-x, but I will be listening to make sure you're not harassing your opponent. Feel free to be argumentative, but not mean or hostile! Thus, it's best to keep the cross-x topical! - I prefer a clear, topical, and well-annunciated round, rather than speeds that cram as many words as possible into a short time. If you're going to fast for me to follow, I will not be able to assess your argument.
 * A few other points:**