National Speech and Debate Tournament
2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US
Nethmin Liyanage Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamFrequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
41+Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
9/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
8/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
9/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I'm an assistant coach @ damien, i'm involved in card cutting & strategy; i know a decent amount about the topic. i think that technical debates that address the topic from multiple angles are the best debates; how you address the topic is up to you; argument innovation & research should be rewarded. my voting record is roughly even in policy vs k rounds. go as fast/slow as you want, just be clear. i won't change how i judge just because it's nsda, so if you've been judged by me before or have read my paradigm, you can expect to get the same vibes. full paradigm available at https://www.tabroom.com/index/paradigm.mhtml?judge_person_id=100961
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.