National Speech and Debate Tournament
2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US
Chris Lowery Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamPolicy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
31-40Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
3/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
2/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
7/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
8/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
7/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
Old school policy debate judge - Abuse/theory even T have to be clearly won and a real abuse to win my ballot on them. Ideally, this should be a clash of policy positions. While I will listen to the K, it is an uphill climb with me. It needs a clear alt - preferably one that I can evaluate in a fiated world vs the aff. Don't go overboard with too many counterplans just to see what sticks
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.