National Speech and Debate Tournament

2022 — Louisville, KY/US

Jimin Park Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

41+

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Policymaker
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

7/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

6/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

6/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important
 

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

3/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:

If there is a judge on the panel who is explicitly anti-spreading because of accessibility concerns or they lack experience judging "faster" debates, I would prefer you slow down. Teams that do not "punt" a judge will be awarded. Isolating a judge will likely result in me docking your speaker points. If another team starts the fire, then you can reciprocate but please attempt to have points of your speech where you speak to the other judge(s). 

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.