Gulati,+Sukhi

Stanford Debater – Class of 2016 (Freshman) Debated for Capitol Debate for 3 years in High School

Overall Notes: 1) I’m really open to broad varieties of argumentation. Ie: I’m equally likely to vote for framework or an aff that kritiks the topic. 2) 2 Conditions to the above: (a) While I am open to a variety of arguments I’m definitely not going to vote on anything that you know is massively morally repugnant (racism good). (b) It would be really hard to persuade me to vote on the Fuck K. 3) Other than judging a few camp rounds, I’m not too familiar with the transportation topic so if you’re using jargon or abbreviations then make sure to explain them so that I know what you’re talking about. 4) Clarity>Speed, I can handle speed but you definitely want to be clear. 5) Tech over truth, but I like smart arguments and you have to explain why concessions matter. 6) Presumption goes to the team with the least change to the status quo unless you convince me otherwise. 7) I support Brian Manuel's TKO policy - but if you're not 1 thousand percent certain don't do it.

Specific Arguments: **Topicality: ** I’ll default to competing interpretations. Even if I, in my heart, think an aff is topical but you win that it’s not then I’ll vote on T. In front of me: debate T like a disad. That means you should compare evidence, expect me to read it and do work comparing what your world of debate looks like. And always bring it back to the plan text/resolution. But – again – my knowledge of the topic is scarce. So if your T violation is super specific – you should slow down and give a good explanation at some point in the debate. **Disads: **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> Internal links are usually the weakest part of a disad. Aff teams should take the time to read neg evidence and make smart, supported, complications of the neg’s story and the negative team should defend their disad’s story well. I think that zero risk of a disad can be a thing but if you’re going for that then spend a lot of time on it. For some reason, there's been an alarming decline in the popularity of the German Economy disad in the past few years. Reading the German Economy disad will be rewarded. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.333333969116211px;">**<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Counterplans: **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">I’m down with whatever. I can definitely be persuaded to vote on theory: so if you’re negative, take it seriously. If you’re aff and you want to go for theory: take it equally seriously starting from the 2AC. Taking it seriously means slowing down a tad, explaining your arguments, and doing line-by-line.

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.333333969116211px;">**<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Counter Advocacies (to K affs): **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">If there is a reasonable stasis point for competition then the affirmative should have to work hard for the permutation. A lot of philosophies that get run as K affs make it possible to permute virtually anything. So, if the negative team is taking the time to run something other than framework and has put in that research, I appreciate that. In short neg: be aggressive about how you’re different and make the aff defend their methodology instead of deferring to the permutation. Aff: work hard for the permutation and really explain why they’ve done their research wrong not why your aff could somehow be interpreted to get out of answering their work. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.333333969116211px;">**<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Kritiks: **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> I like them. I think you need to do a lot of work on the link debate, make smart analytical arguments, and contextualize it to the case. A lot of philosophies are complex and reducing them into a debate round is difficult and takes a lot of skill that I respect so this means that (1) I’ll appreciate it if you take the time to really explain your advocacy in the context of your case (2) I think explanation/how you use your evidence is more important than the evidence itself in this case so you don’t want me calling for all your cards if you are going for a K. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">I don’t think K’s have to have an alt if you do a good job with the link. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Take more time explaining post-modern/psycho-analytic type things to me. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Daryl Burch (DB) coached me in high school, so I’m pretty familiar with race-based arguments/have run them a lot. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 13.333333969116211px;">**<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Performance/Unconventional: **<span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Go for it. Couple of important things though: <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">1) Be genuine. To me, the best thing about performance/unconventional affs is that you’re usually making the debate about something that you believe in. So – be genuine. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">2) Even though I enjoy watching/judging performance debate, take framework seriously. Answer it thoughtfully and do not just throw out a million buzz words to see what sticks. <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">3) (Mentioned above). If you’re going to go for the permutation –explain it well.