Chillappagari,Srikanth

Presentation '17 I like well-explained arguments and impact analysis in relation to those arguments.

1. CP/DA - Again DA's need to have well explained internal links and impact calculus. - CP's are ok, I need to know how it is competitive. - If you choose to make a permutation make it well explained. 2. K's - These debates are the ones that I am the least inclined to, I will evaluate it, but you need to explain how the K affects the debate space and the real world. 3. Phil - I am probably going to have the most trouble judging these debates (along with Kritiks) unless it is simple/traditional. 4. Theory - Go slower on theory and explain super clear what the violation is and how theory as an argument functions to resolve it. 5. T - Same as theory explain why their definitions or whatever is bad for debate and how T solves it. 6. Traditional - Yes.