Instigator / Pro
6
1294
rating
75
debates
18.0%
won
Topic

Ragnar always votes against me and i think its personal

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
12
Sources points
2
8
Spelling and grammar points
3
4
Conduct points
1
4

With 4 votes and 22 points ahead, the winner is ...

Ragnar
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
People
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
28
1757
rating
33
debates
100.0%
won
Description
~ 45 / 5,000

Ragnar should be censored for his bias to me

Round 1
Pro
Ragnar, bro why do you hate me? talk to me
Con
For this debate, I shall be using the style from the formatting guide [1]. Honestly, I’m doing this debate to try to help Bill improve...
 
 
Preamble:
I shall disprove both premises of the resolution
  1. That I always vote against Bill, and
  2. 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...

Verifiably False
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 [2]; giving him his sole victory I might add.
 
I have additionally not voted on all of Bill’s debates.
 
Prolific Voter
My votes account for 12.5% of first page of the leaderboard [3]. 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...
 
Semantics
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.
 
Non-Semantics
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).
 
 
Sources:
  1. https://tiny.cc/DebateArt
  2. https://www.debateart.com/debates/1367/vote_links/3436
  3. https://www.debateart.com/leaderboard/debates?order_direction=desc&order=votes


Round 2
Pro
you always vote against me bro always its there for all too see
Con
Pro has dropped my case, and made no more than a weak argument by assertion. As a reminder, his claims are...
Verifiably False
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 [2]; giving him his sole victory I might add.