National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Jerry Hooton Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamPolicy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
3/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = 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:
5/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I’m a Policy Maker Judge. I look for a legitimate policy proposal and solid evidence and analysis to support it. I like substantial advantages on the Affirmative. Give me a compelling reason to vote Affirmative. For the Negative, I tend to vote for big offensive arguments. I am willing to vote on Topicality if it is presented correctly. DA’s CP’s K’s need to be structured with solid analysis. I love impact calc. Set aside time in your rebuttal for this analysis. Please signpost and slow down, especially on tags. Be nice. Have Fun.
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.