Savant,+Omkar

I have taken this from Kyle Vandenberg:

I debated for Bellarmine College Prep on mostly the local circuit with state and national tournaments thrown in the mix. I participated extensively in traditional debate, so you can expect me to be reasonably open to most strategies and tactics, but be warned that my flowing, tech, and topic-specific knowledge may not be able to match what you want to run, so exercise some caution, and pay attention to if I'm able to get down what you're saying.

I'm not incredibly well-versed in theory or kritiks, and I prefer to hear debates on the resolution itself, so while I'm not inherently against voting on them, you'll have to do more work to convince me to do so, barring a grievous abuse by one debater.

Only use speed if you're doing so in order to have a more in-depth, substantive clash on the topic within the time constraints, not if you're looking to instigate an arms race with your opponent.

One of the best qualities a debater can have is flexibility, so if it's obvious that I can't keep up with your speed or argumentation (even after I say, "Clear" or "Slower"), the onus is on you to adjust.

I think the educational value of debate lies in 1) persuading others, 2) creating logically sound and clear arguments, and 3) being able to civilly discuss and issue from multiple perspectives.

Please weigh, please give voting issues, please signpost, please don't be rude to your opponent, and please substantively clash with your opponent.

At the end of the day, I vote for whichever debater convinced me that his/her advocacy is superior to his/her opponent's. I default to an offense paradigm if no other is advanced and successfully argued.

Have fun, don't take it overly seriously, and congrats on taking the time to do one of the most challenging, worthwhile, and fulfilling activities you can do in high school (in my biased opinion!).