National Speech and Debate Tournament
2024 — Des Moines, IA/US
Rhianne Urbanczyk Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Policy debater in high schoolOccasionally judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
0-10Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
7/91 = slow and deliberate9 = very rapid
QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS
4/91 = 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:
1/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
1/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
5/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
More advice then preferences! You guys make the round. Do your best and I'll try to keep up! K: Case is cool, don't understand presentation or debate as much. Debate Theory: If they're screwing up the round, this is cool, still should argue properly if you can. Conditional Negative: I will flow offensive drops to them, if they run theory. Generic Disadvantages: Be prepared for them to have their speech lined up before you finish speaking. CP: Make sure their plan prevents your advantages, or they'll just claim them.
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.