Zhu,+Vivian

> I did 3 years of policy debate at Kamiak High School (western Washington) from 2009-2012. I now study at UC Berkeley. > I consider myself to be tabula rasa and am open to almost* any kind of argument. I will vote based on what you convince me is most important in this round. This means that: > I like to see clash and prefer depth over breadth of arguments. That said, I am comfortable with spreading as long as you are clear. I want to vote on arguments in the 2NR/2AR that have been clearly argued throughout the debate.
 * for Ks or critical and performance affs: you need to convince me that I should prefer your framework before getting into impact calculus.
 * for topicality and theory: that the abuse is a voting issue; or on the flip side, that it is not a voting issue.

> Be polite, be clear, be persuasive.

> Feel free to ask me any questions you may have about my paradigm before the round.

> *The only arguments I will not consider are those that are blatantly morally repugnant, such as a "rape good" impact turn. You will also be penalized with low speaks if you make such an argument.