National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Malea Floyd Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
NDT/CEDA debater in collegeHow many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Stock issuesRATE OF DELIVERY
3/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
6/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
3/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
I encourage an in-depth explanation of why I should prefer arguments and/or why your supporting logic is superior. As long as rounds are civil and productive I am fairly straightforward judge who takes impact calculus into account.
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.