National Speech and Debate Tournament
2024 — Des Moines, IA/US
Jack Sewpersaud Paradigm
Policy
Policy Debate Judge Philosophy
Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)
Coach of a teamPolicy debater in high school
Frequently judge Policy Debate
How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?
41+Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?
Tabula rasaRATE OF DELIVERY
6/91 = 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:
2/91 = often9 = rarely
COUNTERPLANS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
GENERIC DISADVANTAGES
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS
3/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS
2/91 = acceptable9 = unacceptable
If you have futher questions, please consult my tabroom paradigm or ask before rounds. Overall, I'm ready to hear you debate in whatever style works best for you, although I prefer in-depth argumentation over a bunch of barely developed generic off-case positions. Most of my coaching has been focused on T and Kritiks, but have prepared CP/DA strategies in the past. I think the most important thing to know about me as a judge is that my mentality is education first. I think that's the most important goal in debate, and when debates get messy, that's the framing I fall back onto to resolve messy debates.
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.