National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Erica Baumann Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Policy debater in high schoolOccasionally 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
6/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
6/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
2/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I debated policy for 4 years and coached on-and-off for 2. I haven’t judged much this year cause collage, so be sure to clarify acronyms and warrants. While Ks aren't my fave, i'm good with cap/neolib/security and the like. If you run a high theory K, be sure to be VERY CLEAR about what that K is actually DOING. Everything else is fair game. Be nice to each other, and to me – respect goes both ways. If you’ve got questions, feel free to ask!
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.