Ronak Ahuja ParadigmLast changed 8/24 2:47P PDT
Email - email@example.com
Futures Academy 19 (Previously Chaminade) / Binghamton 23
Respect people's pronouns. Similarly - do not be racist, sexist, transphobic, etc.
I competed on the LD/Policy national circuit for most of my time in high school, and will be debating in college. I qualified to the TOC my junior and senior year, and have experience debating in deep elims in both events.
For what it's worth, towards the end of my career almost all of my speeches contained some sort of post-structuralist philosophy.
Yes, I will vote for framework. I went for it a bunch my senior year.
K - be interesting!! a lack of enthusiasm or obvious disregard for the theory you are reading from is always really upsetting. I prefer if you have links to the plan action, but don't let that deter you from doing what you do best. Using the same language the other team uses to make link arguments is crucial in these debates.
DA's and CP's - The more specific, the better. Well researched pics and advantage counter-plans are some of the best debates. Im open to cheaty counterplans, just be good at the theory debate.
T - I like these debates. I think about it similarly to a cp/da debate. Win that the da's to their model of debate, outweighs the benefit. I've seen a lot of teams treat reasonability and competing interpretations like a forced choice. There's no reason that has to be true and would be pretty persuaded by an argument about evaluating competing interpretations through the lens of reasonability .
Unwarranted arguments even if dropped, are still not arguments. Tech>Truth but I'll likely be tired and if the debate is irresolvable, i'm more likely to do work for the team making more logical arguments.
I was one of the only TOC octofinalists last year who did not open source, as a result I have realized my mistakes and will bump your speaks if you show me your wiki before the round and you have open sourced. [Carolyn made me do this]
I'm very susceptible to good humor and will probably give you high speaks if you make laugh.
Absent a judge kick arg, I will stick the neg with their advocacy.
1nc contradictions are usually okay, double turns are not.
The side advocating for less change gets presumption.