Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2025 — Des Moines, IA/US

Parker Klyn Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team

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: Tech over truth. The only arguments I won't vote on are unwarranted IVIs and "new affs bad." I am happy to adjudicate the round the competitors want to have, whatever that looks like. Judges have a moral obligation to evaluate debates as fairly as possible and any intervention at all does a profound disservice to the hard work and preparation of the students in this wonderful activity. I judge a good amount of national circuit LD, but not policy. With that being said, the only common policy argument I'm not the most confident is counterplan competition, but strong judge instruction will easily overcome that concern. Ask me any questions you'd like before the round.

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.