Instigator / Con
Points: 14

Should you save the best for last?

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 3 votes the winner is ...
WaterPhoenix
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Philosophy
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Required rating
1
Contender / Pro
Points: 11
Description
Definition of best to be used in this debate: Something that excels all others and is of the highest quality and desire. ie. saving the most delicious food for the end of the meal.
Round 1
Published:
First of all, I'd like to thank TheRealNihilist for accepting this debate and would like to apologize for not writing my argument sooner. Now let's get on with it.

Saving the best for last may seem like a harmless impulse control exercise for most people but it's not so. For one thing, saving the best for last is just developing your mindset into always using the worse the materials or eating the worst food first and not using things that are more high quality. Also, "the best" may turn bad after too much "saving". Take the case of the farming grandfather of Amy Cooper Rodriguez who always saved all the best materials in his collection at "the good barn" and over time guess what happened when he died and his children decided to sell the materials in "the good farm"? They had gone bad! Another example would be where the phrase "saving the best for last" is used most often, at the dinner table. When you are at the dinner table and you want to save your favorite food for last don't you realize that your favorite food will taste after you're more full? Or that you might not even want to eat your favorite food because you're full? Also, having too much impulse-control as a child can lead to shyness from not talking to people on impulse or on instinct. Finally, when you use "the best" you can be the best you, for example, if you use a better ball then you can throw farther and dribble better. Or instead of using an old run-down deck of cards to do card tricks you could use a better deck of cards and make your card tricks more fluid and flawless.
Published:
I'd like to thank WaterPhoenix for creating the debate.

Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time.
With this in mind when picking the best people who you care about get hurt.
Therefore saving the best for last is more helpful to your social circle however big it might be.

People always have people they care about. In order to make sure they are taken care of there needs must be met instead of yours. Prioristing the value of your happiness over others well being leads them feeling unhappy and being unhealthy which impacts your happiness and can dampen the best thing you started with.

Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time.
With this in mind when picking the best the journey is cut short.
With this in mind skills that could be gained waiting for the best will not be learnt. You will simply get what you want.

The journey is important. It can be a learning process which can help with other things in life. Take for example driving to a different state. You find out the way you went through was slow and had a lot of traffic while another road had a gas station with things you can eat. In the Journey you have learnt a more effective way of driving to a different state while also having sometime to think about things while on your way there. 

For one thing, saving the best for last is just developing your mindset into always using the worse the materials or eating the worst food first and not using things that are more high quality.
Extreme take on my position. You can have something nice but still have the nicest be for later. Nice doesn't equate to healthy like with cakes, chocolate and junk food which would mean you are for people being really ill and living a bad life eventually given the best food would eventually become a curse.
Take the case of the farming grandfather of Amy Cooper Rodriguez who always saved all the best materials in his collection at "the good barn" and over time guess what happened when he died and his children decided to sell the materials in "the good farm"? They had gone bad!
That is the fault of being a bad business person. If the person waited until her work was finished and sold it when she was free then it would've been the best thing to do but she didn't. She instead didn't even save the best for last instead the best wasn't even saved because it became degraded after they found it.
When you are at the dinner table and you want to save your favorite food for last don't you realize that your favorite food will taste after you're more full? 
Pace yourself better. Instead of picking food that will ruin the experience. Pick ones that don't so the best for last isn't ruined. This isn't the fault of the best of last position.
Or that you might not even want to eat your favorite food because you're full? 
First 3 words I said above.
Or instead of using an old run-down deck of cards to do card tricks you could use a better deck of cards and make your card tricks more fluid and flawless.
You are not saving the best for last. You are simply using the worst forever here because when you pick a deck you get accustomed to it. Not realize there are better and just stick with it. This analogy doesn't work. 
Round 2
Published:
Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time.
With this in mind when picking the best people who you care about get hurt.
Therefore saving the best for last is more helpful to your social circle however big it might be.

People always have people they care about. In order to make sure they are taken care of there needs must be met instead of yours. Prioristing the value of your happiness over others well being leads them feeling unhappy and being unhealthy which impacts your happiness and can dampen the best thing you started with.

Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time.
With this in mind when picking the best the journey is cut short.
With this in mind skills that could be gained waiting for the best will not be learnt. You will simply get what you want.

The journey is important. It can be a learning process which can help with other things in life. Take for example driving to a different state. You find out the way you went through was slow and had a lot of traffic while another road had a gas station with things you can eat. In the Journey you have learnt a more effective way of driving to a different state while also having sometime to think about things while on your way there. 
Nope, best means what it said in the description.


 You can have something nice but still have the nicest be for later.
But what happens when the "nice" thing starts to deteriorate? What would you do then? I know what, having already built your mindset around saving the best for last you'd buy another "nice" thing and still be saving the "nicest" thing. But inevitably both the "nice" thing and the "nicest" thing would deteriorate, leaving you with, you guessed it, nothing. For example, let's say you had two handcrafted wooden mugs one of them was an antique mug and the other was just some random cheap flea market product, and you saved the antique mug instead of using it. But then when you're cheap flea market mug breaks and you get another cheap mug, your antique mug is just sitting there busy gathering mold. And finally, you're old grandfather's antique mug gathers enough mold and becomes rotten you'll just have to live with the fact that you've never used it and on top of all that the cheap mug's always bound to break leaving you to have to buy mug after mug after mug each mug no matter how high quality never the same as your the "nicest" mug.
Nice doesn't equate to healthy like with cakes, chocolate and junk food which would mean you are for people being really ill and living a bad life eventually given the best food would eventually become a curse.
But people have different definitions of nice food, for all you know My favorite food is Brussel sprouts on whole-grain bread topped with natural ranch! (It's not by the way). Also, grammar mistake here.
That is the fault of being a bad business person. If the person waited until her work was finished and sold it when she was free then it would've been the best thing to do but she didn't. She instead didn't even save the best for last instead the best wasn't even saved because it became degraded after they found it.
The purpose of the analogy was to emphasize the mistake the grandfather made, which was saving the best for last, and you just supported my point by saying how bad of a business plan this was.
Pace yourself better. Instead of picking food that will ruin the experience. Pick ones that don't so the best for last isn't ruined. This isn't the fault of the best of last position.
Pace yourself better?!?!?!?!?!?! You're supposed to be convincing us of why you should save the best for last not how. And pace yourself better? C'mon do you really think that when I'm at the dinner table I'm thinking about if I'm pacing myself right? Heck! I don't think even any of us are thinking about that!
You are simply using the worst forever here
That's what saving the best for last does to your mindset, also this is contradictory to when you said: "You can have something nice but still have the nicest be for later." As the "nice" thing is the "worst" thing.
because when you pick a deck you get accustomed to it
Go search up Cardistry and tell me how those companies function if people don't switch decks every other day.
Not realize there are better and just stick with it.
Grammar error and people who save the best for last do realize there are better they just don't want it.


Published:
Nope, best means what it said in the description.
"Something that excels all others and is of the highest quality and desire"
Highest quality is dependent on the measurement you use since you didn't give one. I open to this interpretation and do please challenge on you not clearly laying what you meant with the highest quality.
But what happens when the "nice" thing starts to deteriorate?
That exact same question can be levied at you. At least with mine more important things like taking care of bills can be done before you would have to worry about what are you going to do after the things that made you happy don't make you happy. Whether or not I have answer doesn't make my side better or worse than yours so you asked a question that is meaningless to the discussion. I'll try. What happens when you are too busy enjoying life to pay your bills? How does your view help with that situation?
I know what, having already built your mindset around saving the best for last you'd buy another "nice" thing and still be saving the "nicest" thing.
Saving the best for last could be applied to a meal like you clearly mentioned above. I can start with the starters then the mains then my favorite part which is desserts. The positive of course with leaving desserts last is that I will actually finish healthy that can prolong my life whereas you are too busy eating cake then moving onto to other things to enjoy instead of eating vegetables. 
But inevitably both the "nice" thing and the "nicest" thing would deteriorate, leaving you with, you guessed it, nothing.
Do you not see this problem will arise with you earlier? That would mean people would have to face that disappointment quicker and if they don't fill that happiness in your have given their existence sadness for a much more longer time than I have.
let's say you had two handcrafted wooden mugs one of them was an antique mug and the other was just some random cheap flea market product, and you saved the antique mug instead of using it. But then when you're cheap flea market mug breaks and you get another cheap mug, your antique mug is just sitting there busy gathering mold. And finally, you're old grandfather's antique mug gathers enough mold and becomes rotten you'll just have to live with the fact that you've never used it and on top of all that the cheap mug's always bound to break leaving you to have to buy mug after mug after mug each mug no matter how high quality never the same as your the "nicest" mug.
I can't engage with this hypothetical. No one cares too much about an aesthetics of a cup. Even if they do they simply do it for the brief time they have bought it. Then they simply get accustomed and not realize they have it. Your starting with the best only lasts for the moment of buying the product and possibly using it at the start. The person following me can find enjoyment by striving to keep the mug in pristine condition while also learning about the mug instead of simply carrying on with their life not caring about the mug they bought. 
But people have different definitions of nice food, for all you know My favorite food is Brussel sprouts on whole-grain bread topped with natural ranch! (It's not by the way)
Not my fault your definition is subjective because you didn't decide what measurement you would use for the highest quality item. So since best is subjective the person who follows what I say can simply add in what they like and prepare for what they want while carrying on working.
Also, grammar mistake here.
Also didn't engage with the health problem I brought about with the best. There are very minuscule amount of people who like Brussel sprouts over chocolate. For you to use such a minority case example goes to show how little your lifestyle would help best serve humanity. I on the other hand like with other people that can follow can still healthy food while leaving chocolate for last.
The purpose of the analogy was to emphasize the mistake the grandfather made, which was saving the best for last, and you just supported my point by saying how bad of a business plan this was.
Grandfather's fault was the bad business plan. It wasn't leaving the best till last. You don't understand the meal context where leaving the best till last doesn't mean they leave the chocolate until the moment they die, it means right at the end of their meal. The grandfather could've simply did what he wanted in a time frame that put the stress of more important things to rest like crops, bills and restocking before actually doing what he liked the most. 
Pace yourself better?!?!?!?!?!?! You're supposed to be convincing us of why you should save the best for last not how.
Which is precisely what I am doing. Saving the best till last is under the time frame. I can choose the time frame instead of using your extreme hypothetical like your idea is that we should do everything we hate but in the moment we are almost dead enjoy what we like the most. You take the most insane position of mine while I don't do the same. This is unfair and uncharitable then you have the gall to question and exclamation mark me? I have been cordial while you have given me extreme hypotheticals and ways you have you are annoyed. This isn't conducive to what we are discussing.
C'mon do you really think that when I'm at the dinner table I'm thinking about if I'm pacing myself right? Heck! I don't think even any of us are thinking about that!
An anecdote? This neither bolsters your point or even attempts to. I think it is safe for me to assume that you ought want everyone to follow your system but giving your personal experience doesn't help that. In order to demonstrate to be good you would have to show the positive versus mine but this isn't how you do it.
Here is what an anecdote here if you don't know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdote
"An anecdote is a brief, revealing account of an individual person or an incident"
That's what saving the best for last does to your mindset, also this is contradictory to when you said: "You can have something nice but still have the nicest be for later." As the "nice" thing is the "worst" thing.
It would be a contradiction if my position was do the nicest things and wait for the nicest thing as well but it isn't. My position is that you can do nice things but it is best to leave the nicest things last. Yet another uncharitable take.
Go search up Cardistry and tell me how those companies function if people don't switch decks every other day.
Here my opponent WP is pretty much stating with enough time you can't learn a new skill. This is clearly untrue because what we are doing now as in typing on a keyboard is a very skill that does take time to effectively do. Just this one examples shows like with anything that can be learnt it does take time. Here is a link demonstrating things that can be done in under 8 hours: https://medium.com/skilluped/8-timeless-skills-to-learn-now-in-under-8-hours-to-change-your-life-forever-75e7b339373a
If these things can be learnt so can Cardistry. WP denying this has shown a flaw in his argument even though this really doesn't matter to saving the best till last. So basically I am commenting on a non-sequitur showing WP's position on something other than the debate. I hope people understand that bad ideas can lead to other bad ideas.
Grammar error and people who save the best for last do realize there are better they just don't want it.
Please people look at his over use of the exclamation mark and question mark while also how well I was able to demonstrate my side to be better from WP's rebuttals.

Thanks for reading.

Over to WaterPhoenix


Round 3
Published:
Sorry for not responding as quick I had things to do in real life.

"Something that excels all others and is of the highest quality and desire"
Highest quality is dependent on the measurement you use since you didn't give one. I open to this interpretation and do please challenge on you not clearly laying what you meant with the highest quality.
Yes, but you're getting completely off-topic. I was trying to refute your definition of best which was, "Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time." Which actually is self-contradicting because in this line you say another definition of best (which was the definition I was refuting) but then you go on to agree with me, in your most recent argument, that best does mean the highest quality thereby entirely contradicting you're whole, "Best doesn't always mean the most effective use of your time." And, highest quality means just that, the thing with the highest quality given the situation. And quality is a degree of measurement so I don't know what you mean with "dependent on the measurement". You are simply clutching at straws here trying to point out non-existent flaws in my definition of highest quality instead of making worthwhile arguments or points.
At least with mine more important things like taking care of bills can be done before you would have to worry about what are you going to do after the things that made you happy don't make you happy.
First off, this is a huge grammar error voters. Secondly, what do you mean "mine"? And what are the things that are going to stop you from doing the bills? This is all just one big mess that I can barely understand.
Whether or not I have answer doesn't make my side better or worse than yours so you asked a question that is meaningless to the discussion.
It's not meaningless it's a refute to you saying that you can have something nice and have the nicest. And whether you have an answer does because this shows that you're going around this question and you don't have a counter-point.
What happens when you are too busy enjoying life to pay your bills? How does your view help with that situation?
"What happens when you are too busy enjoying life to pay your bills?" What????? What do you mean with this analogy, this has nothing to do with the topic, what are you talking about????????
I can start with the starters then the mains then my favorite part which is desserts. The positive of course with leaving desserts last is that I will actually finish healthy that can prolong my life 
So now saving the best for last prolongs your lifespan? Because if you don't save the best for last and eat your dessert at someplace besides the end it won't make a difference in your lifespan. My point is that eating your non-favorite foods first makes you less hungry for your favorite food then enjoy it less. The reason people save the dessert for last is that as a kid, in an effort to make them eat their vegetables quicker, their parents gave them the idea of dessert to motivate them. But we're not 6-year-olds pouting about broccoli and Brussel sprouts anymore we're more mature than that and don't need some dessert to motivate us we have the fact the saving the best for last give you a bad mindset and not eating your veggies will give you nutrition deficiency to motivate us to eat our vegetables. 
 whereas you are too busy eating cake then moving onto to other things to enjoy instead of eating vegetables. 
Nevermind that this insult is bad conduct, it makes literally zero grammatical sense and is terrible.
Do you not see this problem will arise with you earlier?
Grammar mistake and that's literally my point, people who save the best for last and have built up this mindset see the problems but want to save the best instead of using it!
That would mean people would have to face that disappointment quicker and if they don't fill that happiness in your have given their existence sadness for a much more longer time than I have.
Dude, seriously get Grammarly or something I honestly don't understand what you're saying here.
I can't engage with this hypothetical
No crapnnuggets you can't. It's a hypothetical analogy it's supposed to demonstrate something not stimulate or engage you.
 Even if they do they simply do it for the brief time they have bought it. Then they simply get accustomed and not realize they have it.
Again, it's an analogy and grammar error. Also, some people do care about the aesthetics of their things forever.
Your starting with the best only lasts for the moment of buying the product and possibly using it at the start.
Not unless they save the best for later like in the analogy and grammar error.
The person following me can find enjoyment by striving to keep the mug in pristine condition while also learning about the mug instead of simply carrying on with their life not caring about the mug they bought. 
Ok, yes let's just say they save it well, but why save it? Why not not save the best for last and seize the day and use the cup?
Not my fault your definition is subjective because you didn't decide what measurement you would use for the highest quality item. So since best is subjective the person who follows what I say can simply add in what they like and prepare for what they want while carrying on working.
I have already addressed this.
Also, grammar mistake here.
Why did you quote that?
Also didn't engage with the health problem I brought about with the best. There are very minuscule amount of people who like Brussel sprouts over chocolate. For you to use such a minority case example goes to show how little your lifestyle would help best serve humanity. I on the other hand like with other people that can follow can still healthy food while leaving chocolate for last.
This contradicts yourself when you said that the best is subjective. And how am I bad at serving humanity because I used a minority case example about Brussel sprouts and chocolate? And saving the chocolate for last will lead you to save other things for last which is my whole argument. Also, grammar mistake.
Grandfather's fault was the bad business plan. It wasn't leaving the best till last.
The bad business plan was saving the best for last go read what I wrote again.
You don't understand the meal context where leaving the best till last doesn't mean they leave the chocolate until the moment they die, it means right at the end of their meal.
No, you don't understand that such a simple thing like this leads to a very bad habit of saving the best for last, which again is my whole point.
The grandfather could've simply did what he wanted in a time frame that put the stress of more important things to rest like crops, bills and restocking before actually doing what he liked the most. 
You're talking about alternate business plans when we're talking about how he failed because he saved the best for last.
I can choose the time frame
Correction, you could choose the time frame before saving the best for last made you always prolong using the best.
 instead of using your extreme hypothetical like your idea is that we should do everything we hate but in the moment we are almost dead enjoy what we like the most.
I never said that.
You take the most insane position of mine while I don't do the same. 
Bro, you literally just said how my hypothetical was, "We should do everything we hate but in the moment we are almost dead enjoy what we like the most."
This is unfair and uncharitable then you have the gall to question and exclamation mark me?
Yes, I have the gall to be stupified at the fact one of your arguments is, "Pace yourself better," and if it seemed I was angry or unruly I wasn't, I was showing that I was confused and am sorry you think that I have been unfair and uncharitable to you. I would say grammar error but I won't.
 I have been cordial while you have given me extreme hypotheticals and ways you have you are annoyed. This isn't conducive to what we are discussing.
Extreme hypotheticals such as? And most of these are facts. 
An anecdote? This neither bolsters your point or even attempts to. I think it is safe for me to assume that you ought want everyone to follow your system but giving your personal experience doesn't help that. In order to demonstrate to be good you would have to show the positive versus mine but this isn't how you do it.
No, it shows how incredulous your "pace yourself better argument is."
It would be a contradiction if my position was do the nicest things and wait for the nicest thing as well but it isn't. My position is that you can do nice things but it is best to leave the nicest things last. 
Are we talking about doing nice things now? Because I thought we were talking about saving nice things.
Here my opponent WP is pretty much stating with enough time you can't learn a new skill.
I was saying that your statement of "you'll get used to run down decks and don't need to switch to a new one" is false.
If these things can be learnt so can Cardistry. WP denying this has shown a flaw in his argument even though this really doesn't matter to saving the best till last. So basically I am commenting on a non-sequitur showing WP's position on something other than the debate. I hope people understand that bad ideas can lead to other bad ideas.
I don't think you read my refute right because I said that people want to switch decks a lot not that you can't learn a new skill. That's complete nonsense.
the exclamation mark and question mark while also how well I was able to demonstrate my side to be better from WP's rebuttals.
Yes, and your conduct was oh so much better. But seriously trn/omar I really didn't mean to offend you and had an amazing time debating with you and hope you can prove me wrong!

Published:
You are simply clutching at straws here trying to point out non-existent flaws in my definition of highest quality instead of making worthwhile arguments or points
No I am not. You have stated how this is the case so this is an argument not explained.
It's not meaningless it's a refute to you saying that you can have something nice and have the nicest. And whether you have an answer does because this shows that you're going around this question and you don't have a counter-point.
It isn't important to the conversation which is why I didn't answer it.
"What happens when you are too busy enjoying life to pay your bills?" What????? What do you mean with this analogy, this has nothing to do with the topic, what are you talking about????????
When I clearly state the problem of not leaving the best for last as in simply burning your money instead of paying your bills you question mark me. I have nothing to work with. 
So now saving the best for last prolongs your lifespan?
Your idea would be that you would always eat desserts. That is not healthy for you but mine is. If I save the desserts for last I would have healthy food before.
Nevermind that this insult is bad conduct, it makes literally zero grammatical sense and is terrible.
That wasn't an insult and you haven't demonstrated it.
No crapnnuggets you can't. It's a hypothetical analogy it's supposed to demonstrate something not stimulate or engage you.
It is supposed to make readers understand your side by applying to their context. You didn't do that for me.
Ok, yes let's just say they save it well, but why save it? Why not not save the best for last and seize the day and use the cup?
Because you have more important things to do like paying bills and taking care of people around you. 

Given that everything else I just read wasn't useful to my side being convincing I will leave it there.

I thank WaterPhoenix for this debate.
Added:
dang that vote removal bump really saved me
Instigator
#9
Added:
wtf
Contender
#8
Added:
--> @Club
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: club// Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 4 points to con for arguments and grammar
>Reason for Decision: Arguments:
Pro conceded in the first round, saying the best for last was a bad business plan. Pro mostly manipulated the meaning so it fit around his arguments, making "the best" probably the least productive, and healthy things, like having fun and eating cake. The arguments he made were fairly weak as Con could've just manipulated it back. Con actually had solid arguments stating, that the best deteriorates if you use it last, and many other points about food.
TRN also was confused about time frames. If one is against "best for last" it doesn't mean they're for "best for first"
Sources:
Con didn't provide sources but, probably used them, whereas Pro used and posted sources. Because of lack of sources for con, I can't judge sources, therefore awarding a tie.
S&G
Both had pretty bad grammar, but TRN had significantly more occurrences.
Conduct
Good conduct for both of them.
Reason for Mod Action>The voter does not appear to sufficiently survey the main arguments or counter arguments of the debate and weigh them to make a decision. While the voter references some arguments - it is unclear why one set of arguments were not sufficient to over turn the other (only statements that they were).
For S&G, the voter only provide a general comparison of S&G: To award S/G points, the voter must (1) give specific examples of S/G errors, (2) explain how these errors were excessive, and (3) compare each debaters' S/G.
*******************************************************************
#7
Added:
i think it all depends on how slaty the best is
#6
Added:
--> @RaielleBrainster22
WHO ARE YOU? Someone's multi-account?
#5
Added:
ggwp
Instigator
#4
Added:
Let's do this ! Whoo Hoo!
#3
Added:
GL omar
#2
Added:
--> @TheRealNihilist
Alright, let's do this.
Instigator
#1
#3
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
I love philosophical no-links-required raw logic debates, I fucking dig this stuff so much and this is what made me fall in love with debating but it's extremely clear that Omar/Pro had no clue what exactly his side represented.
The entire case of Omar's can be summed up as defending against the notion of the best being the most effective thing to use time on... That doesn't mean it should be left until last nor does it explain why you're constantly going to not want to use the higher quality thing. Con correctly points this out continually, explaining a simple concept from the beginning:
"Saving the best for last may seem like a harmless impulse control exercise for most people but it's not so. For one thing, saving the best for last is just developing your mindset into always using the worse the materials or eating the worst food first and not using things that are more high quality. Also, "the best" may turn bad after too much "saving"."
To which Omar replies that this is extreme interpretation of Pro's stance, that things do get worse over time but that we can't have benefits without consequences and many other tautologies surrounding the topic. While I actually think he had a good point with paying bills and could have run 'consequence butterfly effect' lines of reasoning along game theory, Omar instead opts to engage with Con, who was hostile but is new to debating, in an equally hostile way. Conduct is tied because both had bad conduct equally in my eyes.
This became very 'he's wrong omg omg' 'he's wrongerrrrrr omg omg' but ultimately I find that con's opening was succinct and held throughout, as I quoted. The concept Con represents is that as resources diminish (which they will do anyway), you want to at least have some of the best while it lasts. Pro said this was an extremely unfair interpretation of his stance (that one literally should always leave the best until last) but PRO NEVER IS CLEAR ON WHAT HIS ACTUAL STANCE IS.
#2
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
CVB bill.
I would not do this, but 6 hours left, so no guarantee any moderator will be on.
#1
Criterion Con Tie Pro Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
it came down to a debate on what best means