Tabroom.com

National Speech and Debate Tournament

2024 — Des Moines, IA/US

Mal Copeland Paradigm

Policy

Policy Debate Judge Philosophy

Your experience with Policy Debate (check all that apply)

Coach of a team
Policy debater in high school

How many Policy rounds have you judged this year?

0-10

Which best describes your approach to judging Policy Debate?

Tabula rasa

RATE OF DELIVERY

7/91 = slow and deliberate
9 = very rapid

QUANTITY OF ARGUMENTS

5/91 = a few well-developed arguments
9 = the more arguments the better

COMMUNICATION AND ISSUES

7/91 = communication skills most important
9 = resolving substantive issues most important

TOPICALITY: I am willing to vote on topicality:

5/91 = often
9 = rarely

COUNTERPLANS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

GENERIC DISADVANTAGES

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE POSITIONS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

DEBATE THEORY ARGUMENTS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

CRITIQUE (KRITIK) ARGUMENTS

5/91 = acceptable
9 = unacceptable

Additional remarks: My full tabroom paradigm is more explicit about my topicality/Kritik positions, but generally do what you want to do and be ready to slow down and explain your analytics. I have coached policy for 10 years but I do not judge enough debates to keep up with your top speed.

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.