Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2025 — Des Moines, IA/US

Brooklynn Hato Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

21-30

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Games-playing

RATE OF DELIVERY

8/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

6/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

5/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

4/91 = often
9 = rarely

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

Additional remarks: Debaters should debate about what they have chosen to debate about, I will adjudicate the way that I am told to do so. This means judge instruction and quality analysis is important. I'm comfortable judging any style of debate, though, fast techy policy debates are not my favorite. I follow along closely, if I catch you clipping that's an auto loss. Though, I will still follow along and say how I would've voted if clipping did not occur because education is important.

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.