National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Scott Hughes Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Occasionally judge Policy DebateHow many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
11-20Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
6/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
3/91 = 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:
3/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I view debate as an exchange of ideas between two teams. You are free to speak as fast as you desire but I must be able to understand you.
It is the responsibility of the debaters to tell me what you are winning on and why it matters in the round. I really appreciate in the last few speeches when debaters re-emphasize their main points and the importance of them. If either side fails to clearly do this, I will resort to common sense to determine the winner.
Again, clarity is important as I can only vote on what I hear.
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.