Does Kritikal debate have a place here?

1. I'm a bit new to this platform, I used to have an account and I used it for a month about a year ago, but I got super busy with personal issues and dropped it, but I'm back, and saying that, I'm curious how useful kritiks are on this platform. I see a lot of debates say they aren't allowed in the rules, so I was curious how often they are used when not banned and if people are willing to vote on them.

2. As a second question, should kritiks have a space on this platform. I'm a part of live debate circuits and kritiks are everywhere and it brings a lot of questions if they're good or bad for debate as a whole and I wanted to get some opinions on that.

Long story shot, Kritiks can still work here, but they are rather technical and many voters may not understand them if you use them. There are also some restrictions on their usage, as you point out, though honestly I don't think that those efforts serve much of a purpose. We could absolutely have a space for them, though providing a primer on Kritiks would probably be important before implementing such a feature.

Out of curiosity, what do you mean by a primer?

As a judge (which I don't do much), I don't value the K as much as some judge

FMPOV, K's I know are usually slippery slope K's and I can see any K fitting in this category. Even basic K's I read (Neolib, Cap, Fem Eq), have slippery slopes that I find hard to merit as a judge in a debate. I prefer a good DA debate or even a CP debate

I think of a primer as a short introduction to a complex topic. In this case, clarifying what a Kritik is, how it functions, why it exists, and how it is generally structured would be good points to  cover.

Yes except where fairly excluded by request in the debate description.

Kritiks work extremely well against medium-skilled debaters who would otherwise know how to fight against your side. 

They are often wasted effort vs noob opponents who will simply dismiss the kritik as nonsense and try to force through their side (which can work since voters here aren't all expert debate analysts so ironically their lack of skill can get them the upper hand as you're unsure whether to hardball the Kritik or fight their case which they will have spammed quite a few points onto in frustration at your Kritik).

V.S. very skilled opponents it's dangerous because it opens the door for them to Kritik you back and starts to encourage them to play dirty since you are, whereas if you played nice, most would stick to the predictable route and your fighting fair would be your best path to victory or at least at resisting defeat.

It comes down to the skill of your opponent and the perception in the eyes of voters. If you correctly analyse both, this algorithm is pretty secure on this website. You may think I'm just mediocre at debating but my stats will improve over time, I've been playing a strategy of low effort vs consistent reward in a way almost none of my competition is doing. I understand how to win better than I execute said understanding.