Daks,+Daniel

I debated for four years at Scarsdale High School in New York. I competed on the national circuit and went to the TOC twice.

I have no specific preference for types of argumentation, just make sure you explain the relevance of the argument you are making. This means you need to show how your argument functions on the flow, and how it interacts with other arguments (weighing, layering etc.). Telling me how to evaluate the arguments and which are most important will not only give you higher speaks, it will also ensure I view the flow the way you want me to.

I am fine with any speed you want to go at so long as you are clear. I will say “clear” if I am having trouble understanding what you are saying.

I will not hesitate to call any piece of evidence after the round if one of the debaters asks me to do so in a speech. Also, if there is a highly contested piece of evidence, I will most likely call it.

I think theory is a necessary tool, so feel free to run it to check back abuse. This does not mean I love theory debates or get excited because of them. A good substantive debate will impress me just as much as a good theory debate.

Finally, I am very well read in most philosophical movements. This means two things for you as a debater: first, I probably have a very good understanding of whatever your “critical” arguments are saying, so I will call you out if you are intentionally tagging/explaining the arguments incorrectly. Secondly, I will know if you are intentionally using obfuscating language to make your opponent not understand relatively simple concepts. Nonetheless, I enjoy philosophically rich positions, and think they play a good role in debate.

Feel free to ask me anything before the round.

Aside from these things, you can debate in whichever style you enjoy. This is your game, play it as you want.