Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Isabel Jeronimo Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

NDT/CEDA debater in college
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

11-20

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa

RATE OF DELIVERY

5/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

5/91 = 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:

5/91 = often
9 = rarely

COUNTERPLANS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

Additional remarks: I'm pretty open to anything you want to run. I was a K debater and can keep up in policy. Speed is fine as long as it is not exclusionary. Do your thing, and I'll keep up. As long as you all tell me how I should filter the round, it should be clean, otherwise judge intervention will make the round a bit messy.

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.