National Speech and Debate Tournament
2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US
Alex McVey Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamNDT/CEDA debater in college
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
21-30Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
8/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
8/91 = 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:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
I'm the Director of Debate at Kansas State University. I primarily judge college NDT/CEDA Debates. I'm comfortable with going as fast as you want to go, as long as you are clear. I'm comfortable with Kritik arguments on both the aff and neg. I have no really firm rules about what does or does not have to happen in a debate, although my tabroom paradigm certainly will let you know more about my base preferences. I grew up in Kansas, so I also know that many debate circuits don't look like TOC/NDT style debate, and I am comfortable watching those debates too. I view it as my job to meet debaters where they are, and expect debaters to try their best to do the same for me. Have fun and be kind to one another!
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.