National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Lizzy Sabel Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamPolicy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
41+Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Games-playingRATE OF DELIVERY
7/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
8/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
3/91 = 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
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
Read my paradigm on Tabroom for more info. Debate is supposed to be fun and educational; being kind is essential to maintaining that environment. I don't mind speed, but you NEED to be clear. Clearly label your args, clear roadmaps, label positions, signpost, identify arguments that you're responding to, etc. In terms of substance, explain to me how your impacts affect the material conditions of people's lives and why your impacts are more important than your opponents (ex. timeframe, probability, magnitude comparisons). I try my best not to intervene, so if you want me to think something, you must say it. I evaluate based on my flows. You should be telling me how, where, and why to vote for you. Good luck! :)
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.