National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Victoria Knaupp Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamNDT/CEDA debater in college
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
21-30Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
4/91 = 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:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
4/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
8/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
Additional remarks:
I am an old-school CX judge. I am a policy maker who loves a well-developed topicality argument. I will often vote on topicality. Make sure that I can follow the speed; I did parliamentary in college, so it's not usually an issue but do not intentionally spread your opponent out of the room.
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.