Instigator
Points: 0

Cowardly losers should just shut up

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 1 vote the winner is ...
Nemiroff
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Philosophy
Time for argument
One day
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
500
Contender
Points: 1
Description
Those to timid to engage in debate should refrain from mocking those brave enough to learn , a person learns more from defeats than from victory, i'm learning growing stronger, one day i will own this place
Round 1
Published:
Anyone brave enough to engage a battle deserves respect whether or not they win
Published:
I have been provided as much context as explanation regarding the meaning behind this challenge as anyone who may be reading. I can assume it is based off an exchange made in the comments section of this debate:
in which billbatard insulted the intelligence of "yanks"

not even the full context fits in this twitter like character limit arguments. this is all that could fit.


Round 2
Published:
Two wrongs  do not make a right, they teach that in kinder garden, if someone spews petty insults at you, responding in kind in no wakes make you morally superior
Published:
Im not trying to be morally superior. Im just a man reacting to a situation. You insulted a large number of people, you should expect a reaction.

Thank you, and thank you voters for taking your time to vote on this.
No comments yet
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Winner 1 point
Reason:
The resolution has some validity to it, people unwilling to debate should likely refrain from insulting those who do... However the debate did not touch on that subject. "Anyone brave enough to engage a battle deserves respect whether or not they win" can be completely true, but not touch on the subject of people who aren't so brave (as per the resolution).
Con points out the missing context, and suggests it was a direct challenge to him for some argument in a comment section. If this was a call-out debate toward con, that he is both cowardly and a loser would need to be shown; if not, so some example of those people should still be used, along with some explanation (even if it seems self evident) of benefits for them or others were they to just shut up (personally, I would have argued them debating would be what they should do, with con as a good example of the benefits to rising to the challenge)