Instigator / Pro
4
1294
rating
75
debates
18.0%
won
Topic
#1384

Freedom

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Exile
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
1,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1543
rating
8
debates
75.0%
won
Description

By most objective standards the USA is not as free as for example Canada to the North

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

This debate touches on the concept of opportunity cost, trading one thing for another at some expense to other things you might want. Pro seems to argue quality of life, and con counters that if it's at the expense of forcing you how to live it, that's at the direct expense to freedom of choice (particularly related to how we spend out hard earned money).

The main failing in pro's case was not highlighting data points, particularly what exact definition of freedom he was using and ensuring his sources were using the same (or a compatible) one.

S&G:
Seriously, put definitions into the description. If not done, than there's no point complaining about the other side introducing a fair definition.

Sources:
So sources need to be integrated into arguments, not just tossed on at the end like a drunk text.