Cochinwala,+Nadia

I’m a current sophomore at UC Berkeley, and currently debate NPDA Parli. I debated for four years for Evergreen Valley High School - mainly parli, but bits of LD/Policy as well.

Speed: You can go as fast as you need to, but clarity is crucial. If you’re going too fast I will yell “slow” and if you’re slurring I’ll yell “clear.” If you don’t adjust accordingly, I will deduct speaker points. If your opponents are yelling the same, adjust as well.

Argumentation: Give me framing questions at the top and tell me which layers of the debate to evaluate first. My default is to evaluate theory, then K, then case. Down to listen to arguments for why I should evaluate differently.

In specific to identity arguments: I had a stint where I read narratives/identity arguments and can first hand say it gets a bit uncomfortable at times. Once you introduce this into a debate/competitive environment, it becomes an argument and you need to expect people to engage accordingly. That being said, I do see value in these arguments just please have a clear advocacy that isn’t just “endorse the narrative” - don’t make me or your opponents negate your oppression/identity. If there’s an avenue for methods debate its probably fine.

On the theory debate: I default to counter interps, I don’t really think there is a threshold for reasonability, but if the other team doesn’t make CI args I guess I’ll have to buy your reasonability claims. -- unpopular opinion: i can see arguments for an RVI being legit (and so definitely have a lower threshold to vote than a majority of the circuit), it probs is necessary to deter friv theory, but that’s to be debated

Kritik Debate: I don’t operate under the: “i need to know what the alt world looks like” - any alt is fine just make sure solvency is well explained

Case Debate: I debated a lot of case and will always be impressed by a super well articulated politics disad. Still a hardcore believer that a very intricate and well thought out politics disad debate is probably one of the hardest to have. On CPS - condo, dispo, etc is up for debate and I don’t have a particular preference either way (for HS parli specifically - i probably have a higher threshold on voting for condo than the rest of the circuit, but i mean most of the circuit will vote for condo bad the second you start reading it)

I feel uncomfortable voting on shadow extensions and a much safer bet is to actually make those extensions.

Please tag line well - if I don’t know where you are on the flow I’ll just end up flowing straight down which just makes the debate unnecessarily messy.

Weigh arguments - though I probably default to probability/time frame over magnitude. I will listen to you telling me otherwise, just make your argumentation clear.

Please read all advocacies/interps/texts TWICE and SLOWLY

Tag teaming is fine

If you are “not going for something” do it right by extending terminal defense, explaining the way this functions in round if there is any offense on that sheet

For LD/Policy please include me in all email threads / flash me files as well. Flashing/Email Threads can be off time so long as you don’t take forever.