National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Jose Villafuerte Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Occasionally judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Stock issues
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

6/91 = 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

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

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

4/91 = often
9 = rarely
 

COUNTERPLANS

4/91 = 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

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:

I'm a pretty experienced LD and PF format judge. I won't be lost evaluating your debate, but you must write my RFD for me. Meaning, I will vote on whoever gives me the best reason to vote for you. If that voting issue is substantiated throughout the round. I will likely vote on that. Feel free to ask any questions before the round. Make sure all contestants are present.

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.