National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Jim Vincent 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?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
3/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
1/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
4/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
4/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
9/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
9/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
9/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I am an experienced policy judge (more than 10 years), but I am a judge on a circuit that focuses on the speaking skills aspect of the debate. Treat me as a policy option, go slow and clearly explain your arguments. Do not go fast as I expect you to convince me of your arguments (and to do that I need to be able to hear and understand them)
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.