National Speech and Debate Tournament
2025 — Des Moines, IA/US
Travis Stahlman Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Occasionally judge Policy DebateHow many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Speaking skillsRATE OF DELIVERY
1/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
3/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
3/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
3/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
9/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I base my decisions equally on two things: (1) what is on my flow and (2) how the arguments are communicated. If something is dropped and your opponent tells me it was dropped, and explains why it matters, that will weigh heavily. On the other hand, if you make a strong argument but don’t communicate its importance or impact clearly, it may be lost. Framing and weighing matter.
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.