Mehta,+Tej

Background: I used to debate at Edgemont High School. I am currently an Economics Major at Boston College.

I am not biased towards any argument in particular, and am willing to vote on anything - however, there are some specifics:

I will generally default towards competing interpretations. However, I have a very limited knowledge of the topic since I have not been involved with any high school this year, so you will have to make your topicality story very clear to me. ALSO, treat topicality like any other argument - there are impacts, and while they may not be the traditional ones that come up in Kritiks / DAs, they exist. Therefore, I still expect a comparitive impact story thoroughout the debate.
 * Topicality**

The only K I really debated in high school was Cap Bad, so other than that, I have a very limited knowledge of K literature. This does not mean that I will never vote on a K, but you will have to really make your link, impact, and alternative story clear. Also, you have to contextualize the K in terms of the aff and do comparative impact analysis - if the neg just stands up and spews jargon, it becomes very difficult for them to overcome the magnitude of the aff's impacts. Turns case arguments are extremely persuasive, if they are logical.
 * Kritiks**

Big fan. Specifically love a good politics story. Keep up with a lot of politics, really enjoy it, and debated a lot of it in high school. Also, engaging the affirmative on their case is definitely a plus, having specific case frontlines to every team is fantastic. Once again, you have to explain your impact story to me in relation to the affirmative --- I really dislike the "we win on timeframe, magnitude, and probability," because that is PROBABLY not true. You have to explain which one you are winning on and WHY that is the most important standard by which impacts should be judged.
 * DAs**

A well researched CP, especially one specific to the aff, shows the neg has done their research and I applaud it. You must explain the story of the CP and exactly why it solves for the affirmative's impacts. In terms of theory, I will vote on theory but it has to be REALLY well developed, not just some random thing thrown in with the 2NR / 2AR. And please.......do not drop things like condo bad. I am not a fan of these theory arguments / am not really persuaded by them, but if you just blatantly drop them, I have no choice but to vote on them.
 * CPs / PICs**

While I try to not have any biases, I am definitely more on the side of switch-side debate / debate good / all the traditional rules about debate. I can still vote on it but you will REALLY have to persuade me.
 * Performance**

I love a good cross-x and I feel like a lot can be done in those three minutes. However, BE RESPECTFUL - you can engage your opponent in a manner in which you are persuasive without getting angry. If the situation turns hostile, I will start cutting speaker points.
 * Cross-X**

While I have stressed research above, research is not the only thing that is important - logical and persuasive arguments, even if there is no evidence to back it up, can convince me. Do not just blatantly drop an argument if you do not have cards / prewritten blocks, you can still debate things out well. I may also call for evidence after the round if it is necessary - whenever you are cross applying things / extending things, make sure to reference the card by author so I know what you are talking about.
 * Evidence**

Line by line is VERY important - I will not do work for you and try to figure out where you are on the flow if you do not make it clear to me. On that note, speed is totally okay, just be clear. Speed should not come at the expense of clarity.
 * Clarity**

Please feel free to ask me any questions before the round, I'll be happy to answer them.