National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Molly Beck Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamFrequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
11-20Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
3/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
3/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
5/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
8/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
6/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I am looking for a respectful and education-focused round. I will not be able to follow you if you spread and I cannot vote for you if I cannot understand you. If you are running a K, then I expect you to be fully committed to those arguments and not go against the K arguments on any other flows. If you plan to run topicality and say that you could not have prepared for the argument, then I better not hear any on-case arguments. If you are rude and disrespectful to your opponents, then it will be difficult for you to win my ballot. If your arguments are discriminatory toward your opponents or other groups of people, then you are not likely to have a chance of winning my ballot. My full paradigm is on Tabroom.
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.