National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Bryce Sheffield Paradigm

Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

11-20

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa
 

RATE OF DELIVERY

9/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid
 

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

6/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better
 

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

8/91 = 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: I am a tab judge a will remain as unbiased as possible. You tell me how to vote and how to flow, and I will follow the debaters. I will not vote on ad homs or character attacks.

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.