Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2023 — Phoenix/Mesa, AZ/US

Delanie Ness 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?

11-20

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Hypothesis tester

RATE OF DELIVERY

8/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

4/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

9/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

3/91 = 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 will listen to anything you want to read in front of me. attach voters, please. The burden of the negative is to prove that the status quo is better than the aff plan/advocacy/methodology etc. I will vote on theory and it is evaluated first always.

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.