Panday,+Anushka


 * Background:** I'm a second year debater at UGA. I debated for 4 years at Alpharetta High School. I've been a 2A before, but I'm a 2N.

I think debates should be evaluated on a clean slate, so anything that is an argument that is well explained and debated goes.
 * Important/Misc Notes:**

The most important thing in debate is to explain your warrants and impact them. I've always been taught by various coaches, teammates, and lab leaders to __**debate the warrants.**__

Education is the most important tool, so I care about how much an individual learns in each round and I'll try to give as much advice as I can after making my decision.

Cross-ex and your behavior matter. If you a jerk, I won't hesitate to tell you or dock points. I pay attention to questions and answers. If a point is made, you should use it in your constructive/rebuttals. I realize it's a competitive activity, but please be courteous to others since we're all members of the same community. Seriously.


 * Since I'm human, I inevitably have some preferences -**


 * T -** I enjoy debating it on very technical levels, but I don't think it would be the easiest debate to judge since most debaters (including myself) aren't always the neatest when keeping the flow organized. I will definitely vote on the argument if smart arguments are made and properly impacted in terms of real world debate. Always answer the question: What would happen to the topic/debate community? when you are trying to explain your impacts on either side.


 * DAs -** Since I was first taught DA + Case, I think the debate on that level is easiest to understand and is the most interesting to judge. I've run politics my whole debate career, so it's not a foreign concept, but I think I expect more analysis on it given the amount I debated it. It's important for you to tell me how to view offense and defense in the round since I will adapt accordingly. For example, I do not necessarily think you need to win issue-specific uniqueness to win a link turn, but you must articulate how that is possible to win that offense. A 2A should always have defense on an DA impact.


 * CPs -** I'm okay with any CPs, but I like ones that are germane to the plan. I have a high threshold for specific theory arguments like PICs Bad or Conditions Bad if the CP seems specific and their is a warrant for its questionably abusive element. On the flip side, I think that theory arguments could be used strategically to undermine the other teams answers/argument and are obviously a time tradeoff so make them. I can be swayed any way on international fiat, but most of time, I believe it is a reason to reject the argument. When I think a team is winning a CP and there is NB, I'll default offense-defense unless told otherwise.


 * Ks -** I enjoy them, but I don't have much experience running them. Explanation please! I appreciate smart analytic arguments in 2ACs. I side with the aff on shifty alternatives. Specific perms are preferable unless they're vague since the alt is so vague.


 * Case -** I love impact turns. They're the best. I think case defense should always be in the 1NC. In my opinion, too many teams under-utilize case in rounds. Make sure case arguments are frictional with your off case impacts or CP solvency.


 * Theory -** I don't like it so much… however I will vote on it if need be. I'm more sympathetic to a team who reads conditionality against a team reading 5+ advocacies; however, negation theory is where it's at. I think argumentative irresponsibility is compelling if actually explained and impacted. I think that a team should definitely get 1 conditional CP and 1 conditional K since they provide two different means for education and discussion in a round. The 2AC should be strategically adapted according to the arguments and I don't think that is necessarily hard to do. If it really is, then performative contradictions should either be a standard on conditionality or it's own theory voting issue that is extended in the 1AR. Lastly, tell me if I can kick the CP for you when you're neg going for a conditional CP.