Fall T1 NSMSDL Washburne
2019
—
Winnetka,
IL/US
Judges Nov / Var Paradigm List
All Paradigms:
Show
Hide
Jackie Blumin
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Anna Culbertson
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Sophie Gerstman
Washburne
None
Mira Gupta
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
eden hunsader
Hire
8 rounds
None
Brian Kaskey
Washburne
8 rounds
None
Alana Kipnis
Central School
8 rounds
None
Frank Kollar
Hire
8 rounds
None
Max Leibov
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Gwendolyn Lyman
Hire
8 rounds
None
Burke mansour
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Emma Mansour
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
Last changed on
Wed March 2, 2022 at 2:39 AM PDT
New Trier '20 Scripps '24
When evaluating rounds, the most important thing I look for is clear links to explicit impacts and impact weighing. Please make it easy for me to determine who's impacts are more harmful, more long term, etc. I also like when people are funny so throw in a joke and maybe you'll win some speaker points. If you say 'brief off-time roadmap' at any point during the debate I will chuckle and maybe up your speaks. Extensions are very important and often are forgotten :( make sure to extend arguments as well as cards with warrants!! Do not be rude, demeaning, offensive etc to your opponent or anyone else -- i will give you 3 speaker points for humiliation purposes and you'll lose. fine with speed but don't spread if you are in a lay debate -- that is silly and unfair. Signposting is CRITICAL and you should definitely do it. Ultimately have fun in your round and feel free to ask me any questions before we start or after we end.
Shane Michelon
Central School
8 rounds
None
Sia Mittal
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Lara Orhon
Hire
8 rounds
None
Kinar Prasad
Central School
None
megan reimer
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Eva Roytburg
Central School
8 rounds
Sophia Salazar
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
John Sloan
Hire
8 rounds
None
Elizabeth Taylor
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
None
Izaak van Til
Hire
8 rounds
None
Nicholas Wilson
WJHS-HMS
8 rounds
Last changed on
Sun February 18, 2024 at 5:43 AM CDT
updated 2/18/24
what's up! my name is nick (he/him), i'm a coach for new trier and you should put me on the chain: nwilson1744@gmail.com. in high school i competed regularly on the national circuit for new trier and qualed twice. now i'm a sophomore at cornell university's new york state school of industrial & labor relations, where i study union stuff (but don't debate).
i can evaluate debates on the level you would expect of a standard national circuit judge (in terms of speed, flowing, variety of arguments etc) -- i'll do my best to fairly evaluate almost* any argument you make, and the below is to give you a sense of my preexisting knowledge, aesthetic preferences, and implicit biases.
- do what you do best. i like fluent, passionate argumentation and usually went for args i agreed with when i was competing. you being fired up about your favorite aff, K, or tricky procedural whatever will definitely overwhelm any personal bias i may have against the argument.
- this is my third tournament on the topic-- i'm starting to come to grips with the topic but not fluent yet, so don't assume i understand most acronyms/references to topic vibes on T
- i've been told it's also worth noting on this topic that i'm not very good with neoclassical economics. you don't have to explain those args like i'm five, but you should explain them like i haven't ever been able to get better than a B in an econ class.
- i will default to judge kick if there isn't a 2AR argument against it because i think that's what most judges do, but can genuinely go either way on it if you have the debate, maybe lean 70/30 against allowing it.
- i am as good for the K as i am anything else,but i wouldn't say i have a preference for those debates. i went for cap most rounds senior year and am relatively in the lit. if it's what you do best and makes sense in the round, let it rip.
- i am fairly neutral on framework v planless affs -- i have voted for and against it a good amount. when i've voted aff, the aff has often had a clear & stable (as in, consistent from 1AC-2AR) criticism of the resolution or the debate space, tapped into a coherent literature base where 1AC authors actually agree with one another, incorporated a performance or artistic element, and had an aff-specific ballot key warrant. when i've voted neg, the neg has often gone for offense pertaining to real-world skills and research quality, strictly delineated arguments about models of debate from questions of substance, engaged meaningfully with aff offense, and adopted a tone of "we want the best model for good debates" rather than "they broke the rules!" i've always been especially persuaded by arguments about participation in debate and competing strategies for increasing it (or reasons that we shouldn't increase it, if that's your bag).
- i generally prefer debates over substance -- theory and intrinsicness were always weak points for me as a competitor -- not necessarily a bias towards either side in those debates, but going for it makes it more likely i'll get something wrong
- condo is fine i guess, the counterinterp matters infinitely more than how many off were actually read in the round, my only hard-and-fast opinion is that you should slooooooow down when reading your theory blocks
one more non-debate-related note: i have put the skills i learned from policy debate to work as a union organizer, and truly believe that more debaters should find careers within the labor movement. if you are interested in building a more just world and putting your unique skills to work, shoot me an email! i would love to chat about how you can get involved in the incredible resurgence of the labor movement currently going down nationwide.
*Do not read Death Good or the other abhorrent arguments usually listed alongside it in front of me. If you're unsure if your argument is that, feel free to send me a question in the preround. If someone in the debate is made to feel personally unsafe due to arguments or conduct during the debate, I will not hesitate to intervene as I see fit, and will take seriously any safety-related requests of me from competitors (i.e., asking that I stop the round). Your safety and comfort is more important that anything that could happen in-round.