National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Aris Ferreira Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamOccasionally judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Stock issuesRATE OF DELIVERY
1/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
5/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
4/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
7/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
2/91 = 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
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I am pretty open minded as far as the kinds of arguments expected in a policy round. The biggest thing is spreading--I am not here to read a thesis level amount of cards in order to keep up. I am not to found of Topicality arguments but if it works well then its fine.
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.