Agarwal,+Vrinda

I enjoy policy debate and have judged several tournaments. I competed in policy debate for 2 years and public forum/parli for 2 years. The most important things to know about me as a judge is that (1) impact calculus is key (substantiate your cards with impact), (2) I understand that there may be links to genocide/nuclear war, but not everything will result in these. I prefer the more logical/realistic arguments. (3) Respect your opponent! (Rudeness= low speaks). Overall, be careful with theory. If you’re using these arguments, extend/warrant/impact them effectively.

Speed- I have no problem with speed. A fast round is a good round, but be clear. I will say ‘clear’ if this becomes a problem. Slow down for tags/theory. If you are facing a team that is inexperienced in circuit debate, confusing them with spread is not a strategy.

Topicality- I am open to a good t debate.

Flow- I will flow, even if you tell me to stop for some rhetorical reason. The clearer you speak, the clearer my flow will be. If you use flow techniques, i.e. telling me to extend an argument, persuade me as to why I should extend it.

Disads- I like disads, but be specific.

Counterplans- Open to counterplans, but again, be specific.

K’s- these are generally interesting. Know what you are talking about though, and be very clear. A K will not necessarily win a round.

I will not read evidence post-round unless I absolutely have to. I vote based on your impact analysis, and the voters that you determine. Give me your own evaluative framework for the round. If I am not given one, I will have to make my own. Enjoy the round! Respect your opponent.