vote aff

Dale Carnegie once said, "People rarely succeed unless they have fun in what they are doing." It is because I agree with Dale Carnegie that I can only affirm the resolution: I should stop debating the way I am debating.
Definitions from Lindsay's brain, 2006:
"The way I am debating": Focusing on winning, caring about the results of the round, expecting myself to do well, treating it as a measurement of self-worth.
Observation 1: Value and criterion
The value that must upheld in today's blog entry is my emotional well-being. Without my emotional well-being I am left as a hollow shell of a human being. The criterion that will weigh my emotional well-being is fun. Fun is defined by Lindsay's brain in 2006 as verbally: enjoying something no matter the results; or nounally: a sense of satisfaction derived from an action. Fun can weigh my emotional well-being in a debate round because if I do not have fun, then no matter the outcome the debate was not worthwhile and my emotional well-being is stripped away.
Contention one: The way I am currently debating is emotionally detrimental.
a. I hate myself when I lose
Currently, when I found out I have lost a round, I procede to hate myself and get angry at myself. I feel as if my self worth as a human being has lowered. This is not valuing my emotional wellbeing at all, and I am having no fun.
b. I leave debate tournaments feeling completely emotionall drained.
Everytime I am done with a tournament, whether I have done well or not, I feel as if I have been through an intensely emotionally trying experience. It frays my emotions and it leaves me vulnerable and especially anxious. This is not upholding my emotional wellbeing and my criterion of fun would never uphold such a seriously detrimental effect.
Contention two: If I changed the way I debated, it would be emotionally beneficial.
a. Not caring as much about winning would make the rounds more fun
If I wasn't so focused on winning I could be more focused on passionate and running odd crap that nobody will expect, or weird positions like flex negs, critical affs, and straight refutation. I wouldn't have to worry about winning or losing the round, because rounds wouldn't reflect my skills when I am debating at my best, but rather my skills at debating interesting positions. In this way my criterion of fun upholds my emotional wellbeing if I change the way I debate.
b. Believing in what I was doing would make rounds more fun
If I stopped running normal positions and ran what I really believe in, no matter what it took to manipulate it, I wouldn't sound bored or distanced in rounds; I would sound passionate and involved. I would be enjoying arguing something I truly believe in. In this manner my criterion of fun would uphold my value of emotional wellbeing.
In conclusion, the resolution must be affirmed or I will emotionally implode and spend the rest of my life in a mental hospital. I have reached a threshold and I cannot continue doing things the way that I am doing them.
Vote aff.