Kurupassery,+Akash

**Summary:** Run arguments that you are comfortable with. I will vote on anything but make sure you know the arguments you are running. Cross-ex is devastating on revealing shoddy link chains. **About Me:** Junior at the University School of Nashville. 3 years of policy debate including this topic. I have been a mostly kritikal 2N going one or two off every round.

Add me to the email chain: akashkurupassery18@email.usn.org

**Argument Preferences:** **CP:** I will vote on cheaty CPs if you lose the tech debate, but I’m more aff leaning if you choose to go for them. **DA:** Impact Comparison goes far. **K:** I’m familiar with most of the literature. Even if I don’t know the specific author you are reading, you should define your terms and your analysis should be specific enough that I can grasp the argument and evaluate it. **T:** Mostly ineffective in creating a limited topic. It can be strategic if you’re a small team. I default to reasonability vs. most affs. **K affs:** Win framework + defend method. Perms are probably illegit if the link is decent to the method/analysis. **Theory:** Warrant out your arguments and don’t spread through blocks. The words “strat skew” mean nothing to me without a warrant. I will not vote on extrapolation in the next speech on these words alone. Cheating will be handled at my discretion - don't do it. Ask before the round any questions you have on this philosophy!