Ng,+Victor


 * Affiliation ** : Westwood High School, Brandeis University


 * General: ** CX debate in high school

Opinions on LD Stuff:

Not particularly a fan of spreading in LD, especially since it often comes at the cost of clarity.

Something I notice a lot of novice LDers don't do is value comparison. I think you should be giving me a reason why I should prefer your value over your opponents in order to evaluate the debate.

Criterion: I personally enjoy debates when the two debaters have a similar value, in which case it becomes which criterion is used to reach the value the best. Those in my opinion lead to good clash and the best kind of debate.

I default to a policymaking framework, based on a utilitarian view unless you have presented alternative frameworks.

I won't extend arguments for you if they're dropped. Even if they're dropped, you need to point out it was dropped and explain how it matters.


 * Theory: ** I don't enjoy watching or judging theory debates but if the other team is doing something that is clearly abusive, feel free to run it.

**Disads**: I think they're interesting in LD. Not sure if they're necessarily the best argument, but they seem to be mishandled often enough.


 * Counterplans: ** I tend to give the aff a lot of leeway on the permutation if it is explained well.