Jackson,+Jalisa

I will attempt to keep this short, sweet, and simple. I am a K debater but don't let that scare you policy people. Theory debates ought to be explained and impacted, but are otherwise encouraged. I will vote on T but it has to be well explained!! I will vote on the cheap shot. As long as it is an argument that is impacted I will vote on it. Absent another framework at the end of the debate I will default to the standard policy maker mindset. I will believe that I am making your plan happen at the end of the debate and all that jazz. I view the world of the K just like any other argument. There is always a claim, warrant, and impact. If you do ride the K train, please have some discussion of what the world of the alternative looks like and what that means. Give me the big picture on both sides (what does the policy world look like in relation to the k world, and why is your world better). I don’t care about the theoretical legitimacy of said alt. I only really have two rules. 1.) DEFEND WHAT YOU DO. 2.) HAVE FUN. What that means for you in the world of debate I can’t know but simply defend what you do and have fun. Any other questions please ask