National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

John Anderson Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

21-30

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Policymaker
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

8/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

7/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

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

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

4/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks: I primarily judge TFA tournaments in Texas. I’m okay with speed but certainly have a limit. I will yell “slow” if I need to. I’m fine with you reading any argument (that isn’t blatantly offensive or disrespectful) but I have a higher threshold on frivolous theory, Kritiks I’m not familiar with, or 1NC strats with 6 or more off. Feel free to ask questions about my judging or experience.

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.