Rekhi,+Jaipaul

Jaipaul Rekhi
Debate is a game. I don’t have rules that you have to follow…so you can play however you want. Whatever I personally think about the politics da, agamben, the delay cp, etc. should be irrelevant to you. I have no interest in denying you the tools you use to succeed. Bottom line is that I really don’t care about what you argue.

Big things for me:

1. Extend arguments not cites and claims. If I don’t understand because you haven’t explained to me, then I won’t read your ev to figure it out. I’ll read your ev if you explain it (at some point) and not just “extend” it. Not trying to be all high-and-mighty here, I just don’t want to have to have a debate in my head while reading everyone’s cards.

2. Focus on strategy vs. arguments. It’s important to me that your last speeches (2nr/2ar) are more about how your strategy interacts with the other teams rather than just extend all your ev and expect me to figure out why you win.

3. Don’t constantly repeat yourself…elaborate…explain how what you said interacts with how they have responded. If I have written down what you’ve said before, there’s no point in forcing me to write it down again.

4. I am honestly down with whatever you are trying to do. The last thing ill say is about “framework”:

WHEN YOU ARE NEG: When the aff says util bad, it is not a voting issue. If they have a plan, its topical, and they defend it (meaning you can read your disads to it/cp’s that are competitive with it), but read a k advantage, you will lose if you go for framework. Just read a util card instead. Read 2 in fact. Win that. I don’t think they abused you. That is ridiculous. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think framework is a bad argument (see above: I don’t care). Framework is fine like anything else, but ethics/deontology/util bad/etc. is not the same as not reading a plan, not defending a plan, not defending anything topical, or reading an aff about flying purple monkeys.

WHEN YOU ARE AFF: If the Neg reads a K, im *probably* not going to vote for you because that is "cheating". The BEST way to go for framework on the aff in front of me is to say that the neg’s framework shouldn’t exclude the aff… you should get your plan and advantages to weigh against the K. And then, once again, beat them on framework substance (util is good/ontology bad/language focus bad/etc.).