National Speech and Debate Tournament

2022 — Louisville, KY/US

Brody White Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Policy debater in high school
Occasionally judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Games-playing
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

7/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

4/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

5/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important
 

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

2/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

7/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks: Respect should be a priority. I will mark down on speaker points for rudeness. I am cool with spreading, differentiate speed between tags, authors and dates, important internal texts, off and on case. Please also tell me where to flow analytics or include them in the email chain. This is a game, I’m pretty open to any type of argumentation as long as you are able to provide evidence. I don’t want to see anymore topicalities with no evidence. Good luck.

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.