National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Matthew Jefferson 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
8/91 = 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:
2/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
6/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
I was an old school policy debater who competed in nationals elimination rounds. I enjoy topic based debate including solvency, advantages/disadvantages, topicality, etc.
I will listen to and consider counterplans and critiques, but they need to be well argued and committed to, not just throwaway arguments intended to overwhelm the other team with quantity.
Overall - quality argumentation and debate is key.
I am comfortable with any rate of speech.
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.