National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Khristian Owens 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?
11-20Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
6/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
5/91 = 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:
6/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
6/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
One of the most important things I look for in a round is good clash with clear impacts on arguments and for debaters to weigh arguments clearly explaining which impacts are more significant, more probably, greatest harm, etc. I come into the round with a blank slate mindset, it's up to the debaters to make it clear what the voters should be in the round.
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.