Boukis,+Alexander


 * Name:** Alex Boukis
 * School:** Benjamin N. Cardozo High School (2015) / Emory University (2019)
 * Last Edited:** 1/26/2016

I haven't judged/engaged in a debate round in over a year, so I am not fully adept with current debate norms and practices. With that being said, it is your utmost responsibility to be as clear in the round as possible - more on this later. Disregarding explicitly offensive/disgusting arguments, so long as your argument contains a warrant (and you articulate such), I will vote on it. Also, bear in mind that I have not even briefly glanced at the topic lit for the current resolution.

I'll keep adding/updating this as I judge more.


 * My Preferences (and More):**
 * 1) I will yell speed/clear as many times as necessary.
 * 2) Plans, CPs, T, Theory, Skep, etc. are all fine.
 * 3) Slow down //significantly// on tags, analytic arguments, interps, and advocacy texts. Slow down on dense philosophical, technical, and kritical arguments; do not assume I understand what you are talking about.
 * 4) I have a very low threshold for extensions of conceded arguments, but you still need to extend something.
 * 5) Please weigh.
 * 6) Be as clear and concise as possible. This means that a) your spreading needs to be coherent, so you should go at around 85% your top speed and b) **__that you need to clearly articulate to me which are the most important arguments in the round, how said arguments function in relation to everything else, and why you are winning them.__** If you can't do a good job giving yourself multiple outs in the round, then just do a great job articulating the single out that you have in the round. I would prefer being left with only one, well-constructed option to vote for your respective side, rather than have four poorly constructed arguments on each side and neither of you did any interactions/weighing of the arguments. Make my decision-calculus be as straightforward for you as possible. Doing this well will get you the W and high speaks.
 * 7) Theory Defaults: Competing Interps, No RVIs, Drop the Argument, Text of the Interp
 * 8) Be respectful to everyone involved.
 * 9) Tricks are fine, but don't blip through 15 reasons why I should auto-affirm in 30 seconds. Remember what I said about being clear.
 * 10) Theory is fine to use strategically, but I'm sure this preference will change sooner, rather than later.
 * 11) I am not too familiar with dense K lit. If you think you can articulate it well to me, then go for it. Otherwise, hedge your bets and don't go for it.
 * 12) I //currently// think that terminal defense and embedded clash are possible.

There is so much more to debate/what I think of debate than what is articulated above, so please feel free to reach out to me and ask me questions. If you can't reach out to me via normal means (facebook, in person, etc.), then feel free to email me alex.boukis@emory.edu