Ganeshan,+Vinayak

Monte Vista High School (2009 - 2012) Have Debated in LD at both the state and national levels for four years. Competed in Extemporaneous Speech at the state and national levels

Rant: I believe that Lincoln Douglas debate was conceived with the purpose of having debates operating on moral or hypothetical arguments while simultaneously being accessible to viewers uneducated on the subject. That being said, I will strongly prefer arguments that are logical, evidenced, and impacted clearly rather than the jumble of esoteric kritiks, topicality and other a priori arguments that have become more common in this style of debate. Presentation is hugely important; I will favor the debater who can clearly explain his positional advantage in the round above someone who cannot (even if that debater is losing on the flow). Just impact clearly and speak well.

I have some basic metrics for judging any LD round

1. Evidence: This is required. I will not buy arguments that are not warranted. Evidence can be theoretical or empirical, although I will favor empirical evidence. If an opponent asks for evidence, you are required to provide it. If I ask for evidence, you are required to provide it. If I know that your evidence is untrue or fudged, I will do everything in my power to remove you from the tournament.

2. Theory: I believe Lincoln Douglas debate ought to be accessible to the layperson, and as a result I highly frown upon any type of theory. Unless your theory is extremely easy to explain and understand to an average viewer, I will vote you down.

3. Spreading: I can handle relatively fast debates, but again, for the sake of the purpose of LD, i highly encourage debaters to use an average speed to explain themselves. If you speak so quickly that I cannot flow your arguments, you will lose the round.

4. Arguments: Have a clear claim - warrant - impact(s) flow in your argument so I can follow it. The arguments can be "wonky" as long as they are meaningful and impacted (probability and magnitude calculus). I enjoy original and independent analysis, rather than a the standard reading of blocks.

5. Courtesy: Respecting one another is a huge part of debate. If you resort to personal attacks and/or derogatory terms in any way, you will lose the round. Attack the argument, not the person.

That being said, I look forward to hearing some solid, down-to-earth debates.