Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Eric Schwerdtfeger 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?

41+

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa

RATE OF DELIVERY

8/91 = 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:

1/91 = often
9 = rarely

COUNTERPLANS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

1/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

Additional remarks:

This paint by numbers approach is probably unhelpful for most debaters. You would be much better served by actually reading the thoughts I took the time to write. You can find those by clicking the "Paradigms" tab on the Tabroom.com homepage and searching my last name in the search bar on the right hand side of the screen.

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.