Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2025 — Des Moines, IA/US

E. Cook Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
NDT/CEDA debater in college
Policy debater in high school
Occasionally judge Policy Debate

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

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

5/91 = 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:

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 have been a TOC/national circuit judge for the last 5 years. I typically judge LD, but debated in high school and college in policy debate. Debate the way that you want to - I am open to hearing any argument and can judge any style of debate (although, I have a high threshold for theory arguments. You definitely need to win an in-round abuse claim to win a theory debate).

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.