Chomba,+Pamela

Pamela Chomba --- Current Marist Colllege Debater, debated at Newark Science High School

I am open to any paradigm as long as you explain it and justify it. It can be from kritik to policy. I’m more open to performance affirmative now than before, but it does not mean I will immediately vote for them, you always have to defend it and win.

**Topicality** – I have voted on topicality before and it used to be one of my favorites. Now, I will listen to it, and can vote, but not just because they are not topical. If they’re not topical, it matters little to me unless you give me warrants and stories on why it’s bad. Having a list of topical cases and comparing them can help.

**Disads** – You could probably win them if the other team doesn’t answer it, but I still expect you to explain the link story (since some often forget) and the impact. If it ends in nuke war, don’t just tell me that; compare it to the affirmative since their impacts are probably systemic and/or real.

**Kritik** – The best thing you can do with a kritik is to tell the truth. You’re evidence is there for a reason, and as long as you stay true to it, your kritik becomes more valuable. Don’t say you will change the world, when in fact you probably won’t. Explaining the ethics of the kritik is important and there for a reason. Other than that, compare it to the affirmative (or negative) and explain your impacts, tell me how it happens! Then, tell me how you prevent them or solve for them. Those are just the basics. If there is anything else, feel free to ask me in round.