Angela and Zofia – Brown 102A
Matthew Bondy
Pavi Chari
Rohit Mucherla
Kevin Xie

Charles and Jared – Brown Lounge
Ken Aizawa
Euirim Choi
Matthew Edwards
Grant Khosla

Chris and James – Bissell Study
Alvin Chen
JJ Kim
Chris Lee
James Nelson

Daniel and Noah – Brown 101B
Ilana Goldberg
Alex Kane
Garrett Yien
David Zhang

Hannah and Cory – Brown 101C
Caroline Congdon
Michael Kaiser
Gary Kim
Wesley Langlais

Joyce and Will – Brown 103E
Shiva Bhupathiraju
Adam Starr
Thomas Stirrat
Aren Torikian

Kathryn and Jordan – Cohen Lounge
Stephen Dings
Adam Hassoun
Lawrence Mead
Bryan Brickman


Katie and Joel – Brown Study
Corey Anderson
Alex Lee
Dan Pantelo
Sadie Valentine

Lucy and Parth – Brown 103D
Abe Benghiat
Kelsey Harmatta
Jacob Kahn

Maggie and Liam – Brown 103C
Arjun Krishnan
Emily Ma
Daniel Newman
Julia Schnall

Mikaela and Chaitali – Cohen Study
Hellen Fale
Steven Hess
Wenchen Huang
Sam Thompson

Nicole and Jackie – Brown-Little Lounge
Dan Paradis
Krishna Patel
Sharvaj Phene
Vicky Semaski

Sydney and Robert – Cohen-Bissell Lounge
Dom Cameron-Rouge
Jason Papalexopoulos
Margarita Ren
Brianna Lavelle







1AC Read the Constellation 1AC with the leadership and NMD advantages
CX 1 minute
1NC 4 minutes: read the DA and CP shells. For this mini debate, there will not be any case arguments.
CX 1 minute
2AC 4 minutes: respond to the DA and CP, including both a theory argument and regular answers to the CP.
CX 1 minute
2NC 5 minutes: extend the DA by refuting each 2AC response.
CX 1 minute
1NR 5 minutes: extend the CP by refuting each 2AC response, including the theory argument.
1AR 4 minutes: pick a few arguments to extend against the DA and the CP, refuting 2NC/1NR responses, including the theory argument.
2NR 5 minutes: extend the DA and CP, refuting all 1AR responses, and resolve the debate for the judge, explaining why your arguments/evidence are better than theirs when appropriate.
2AR 5 minutes: either extend your theory argument or extend your best regular answers to the DA and CP and resolve the debate for the judge, explaining why your arguments/evidence are better than theirs when appropriate.