National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Tyler Renshaw Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Stock issuesRATE OF DELIVERY
5/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
5/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
5/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
9/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
Your presentation and links should be clear and understandable.
Please be respectful during CX. Strive to be brief when responding to questions in CX, and please don't cut each other off.
I am to some extent a "truth" judge. You don't have to prove very basic concepts or issues.
Finally, kritiks and topicality arguments are fine, but please don't use pure debate theory arguments!
Note: if you wish for your pronouns to appear the debaters you judge on text/email blasts, log into Tabroom, click Profile at top, and add them in the Pronouns field.