Ragnar always votes against me and i think its personal
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
Spelling and grammar points
With 4 votes and 22 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
~ 45 / 5,000
Ragnar should be censored for his bias to me
Ragnar, bro why do you hate me? talk to me
For this debate, I shall be using the style from the formatting guide . Honestly, I’m doing this debate to try to help Bill improve...
I shall disprove both premises of the resolution
- That I always vote against Bill, and
- That my voting regarding Bill is personally targeted against him.
Burden of Proof
The resolution is divided between two premises. Bill should win if he proves both with some degree of certainty, and I should win if such fails (either due to my efforts, or him just not making a case).
I. “always votes against”:
Avoiding any games of how frequently I do other activities besides voting, I shall take this to mean that I vote against him on all of his debates...
On the debate “Standard of living and quality of life are different things,” due to him offering what I considered to be a superior argument, I graded the arguments in favor of Bill ; giving him his sole victory I might add.
I have additionally not voted on all of Bill’s debates.
My votes account for 12.5% of first page of the leaderboard . This can cause confusion as I vote a lot; meaning if someone is giving poor performances, I am statistically likely to cast many votes against them.
II. “its personal” [sic]:
For this one, I shall highlight the two paths Bill is likely to choose between...
While I hope this premise is to mean just that it’s personal; Bill has an advantage he can press here, in that he precluded the statement with “i think” [sic], giving him the semantic path that I cannot disprove what he truly thinks. If he goes that path, I will of course argue that he must offer some minor proof to his internal thoughts.
Going this route, Bill must show some evidence that I hold some type of personal grudge against him. If he wronged me at some point, that would be good evidence. Until such has been presented, I cannot offer evidence against it (aside from what I did in the Prolific Voter subpoint).
you always vote against me bro always its there for all too see
Pro has dropped my case, and made no more than a weak argument by assertion. As a reminder, his claims are...
Verifiably FalseOn the debate “Standard of living and quality of life are different things,” due to him offering what I considered to be a superior argument, I graded the arguments in favor of Bill ; giving him his sole victory I might add.