National Speech and Debate Tournament
2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US
Jonathan Spencer Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamPolicy debater in high school
Occasionally judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
11-20Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
7/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
9/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
5/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
5/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
6/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Please reference my Tabroom Paradigm for my personal bio. In rounds I judge it is acceptable to utilize spreading. I will be factoring in your delivery, quality of arguments & your ability to formulate effective contentions. Should you choose to launch a counter plan I will be looking for you to not neglect the solvency & value of the Aff case your are opposing. Best of luck! JS
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.