Jin,Grace

Background: I did 4 years of Lincoln Douglas at Cary Academy High School, NC, and am currently a student at Yale University. I was a traditional debater who focused on contention level debate but also traveled a decent amount to national tournaments, meaning I have a semi-substantial amount of exposure with circuit. I also dabbled in Congressional Debate and Parliamentary Debate, and am relatively familiar with every form of NSDA debate save for CX. (Search me up on NSDA if you have more questions about background).

LD: I was a traditional debater in high school, and **will do my best when evaluating contention level arguments**. That being said, **I will evaluate almost anything you have to say.** There are a few exceptions: obviously, I need you to be respectful, etc.

As far as speed goes, **I don’t enjoy it, but I will likely be able to flow your speed.** Be fair: if you spread and your opponent doesn’t, I’ll be receptive to speed bad/speed kritiks, etc.

I’ll listen to Ks, Theory, CPs, most offs—but I’m not a huge fan of T or PICs. Once again, run what you want, I’ll evaluate anything, but **I HIGHLY prefer debates that remain topical. If you run offs, give me reasons to vote for them.**

Speaker points will be between 25-30 unless you really do something wrong. **Women/POC: if you’re used to being deducted speaks for ‘aggression’, ‘screechiness’, etc., you certainly won’t find that from me.**

I was never much of a value debater, and **winning the framework, except in very rare scenarios, DOES NOT win you the round.**


 * Signposting** is appreciated, **cross apply** your arguments if possible, and I cannot do the **weighing** for you. **Voting issues** are very important.

TL;DR: Traditional background but with lots of circuit exposure. Will evaluate almost anything, but be respectful. Weigh, warrant, voting issues.