National Speech and Debate Tournament
2022 — Louisville, KY/US
Travis Lamb 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?
PolicymakerRATE OF DELIVERY
6/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
5/91 = a few well-developed arguments9 = the more arguments the better
COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES
7/91 = communication skills most important9 = resolving substantive issues most important
TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:
7/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
To me, *communication skills and resolution of substantive issues are roughly of equal importance, *fairly rapid delivery is acceptable so long as the presentation is clearly enunciated, very rapid speed discouraged, *CPs are acceptable if justified and if consistent with other elements of the negative strategy *Generic DAs are acceptable if specific links are clearly analyzed *Ks are acceptable even if inconsistent with other elements of a team's strategy Substantively, tread lightly IF attempting to mitigate harm. Also, don't overstate/oversimplify complex issues like racism, sexism, discrimination using platitudes. Stylistically, should go without saying, but don't be too clever for your own good and don't be abrasive to your opponent, including personal attacks/insults. Treat one another respectfully, or you may find yourself on the losing end of my ballot.
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.