National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Eric Mueller Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamHow many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
41+Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
9/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
7/91 = 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:
3/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I am open to most anything. I usually weigh impacts of DAs vs. case solvency and harm. I often find myself voting on counterplans and Kritik arguments. Make sure your CP has a clear net benefit and you should be fine. Multiple CPs and conditionality can be OK but also abusive depending on how they are used. I'm not a huge fan of process CPs but I vote on them often because affs misinterpret them. Tell me how to vote in the last rebuttal. Why are you winning? I am evidence oriented and often make decisions based on how the evidence is used and how good it is.
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.