National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Jack Allen 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?

Stock issues
 

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

7/91 = 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

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

2/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

3/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
 

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

7/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:

I debated for four years, 3 of which were in policy. I am ok with speed, but I will let you know if you are going fast enough not to understand you. If you continue to maintain that speed, I will stop flowing. I have a functional understanding of most events. However, I am lacking a little bit in PF. I don't flow CX. It is a time for you to learn from your opponents. If you use CX to try to further your arguments that won't help you. If something comes up in CX, it is NOT on the flow. Kritiks are legal but if you want to run them you have to actually know how.

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.