Narayan,+Priyanka

Priyanka Narayan Wayzata High School ‘14 Harvard ‘18

Both teams should debate whatever they are best at. Remember, debate should be a fun, educational activity; so be respectful to your opponents and partner.

Topicality – I default to competing interpretations, and then vote for what I think is best for the activity. That being said, I can be persuaded by reasonability if the neg’s interpretation is too arbitrary.

Disads – I love disad/case or disad/cp debates. I often went for politics or other disads in high school, and I appreciate and will reward case-specific strategies. Impact calc is really important, as well as 2nr framing. The aff can win 0 risk of a link to really silly disads.

Kritiks – I am not very familiar with high-theory authors, but I will vote for the K if the alt and links are well-explained and aff-specific. Neg, remember to address the case. If you never talk about the aff, I probably won’t vote for you. Aff, don’t forget the eight minutes of your 1ac when you answer the K, and make sure you don’t lose it later in the debate.

Counterplans – I don’t think process counterplans are competitive, but I can be persuaded otherwise. Having specific solvency evidence for the aff helps. I love other counterplans. The neg should make sure to do specific comparisons with a solid explanation of how the counterplan is able to solve the aff.

Theory – 2 conditional advocacies are fine. I lean neg on PIC theory. I can be persuaded otherwise. Make sure you clearly impact your arguments and slow down.