Instigator / Con
9
1528
rating
11
debates
59.09%
won
Topic
#1503

Death Penalty/Capital Punishment

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
18
Better sources
4
12
Better legibility
2
6
Better conduct
3
4

After 6 votes and with 31 points ahead, the winner is...

MisterChris
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
40
1762
rating
45
debates
88.89%
won
Description

Rules
NO FORFEITING
NO WAIVING- UNLESS DISCUSSED VIA PM's/COMMENTS
NO EXCESSIVE CUSSING
Violation of these rules will result in full points awarded to the opponent of the rule breaker.
FORMAT:
Round 1: Opening Statements
Round 2: Rebuttals/Added Arguments
Round 3: Closing Statements/Rebuttals
-----------------------------------------------------------
Definitions will be provided in R1, so the opponent can object as soon as he starts his arguments.
-----------------------------------------------------------

-->
@Barney

Via PM's. Please vote for pro.

-->
@MisterChris

When and where did the concession happen?

-->
@MisterChris

I devote wayyy to much time to this site.

-->
@AvoidDeath

That was quick. I would've liked a bit more time but this works.

-->
@MisterChris

Cool.

-->
@AvoidDeath

I shall submit this weekend

-->
@MisterChris

4 days

-->
@Barney

Thanks

-->
@AvoidDeath

Asking for feedback is always allowed.

Regarding your preamble:
1. Restating the format seems a waste.
2. You did better than anything the quote tool would have done (I'm a firm believer in formatting quotes, but that tool usually just makes things harder to read).

I only skimmed over the rest (wouldn't be fair to your opponent to give your case a more in depth reading of yours when his is not available to do likewise). It looks good, touches on many of the main points to be expected, putting a .edu paper near the start was wise and the other sources seemed fine (they can be mitigated if their bias is brought up, but that doesn't change their factual information unless their bias is proven to be overwhelming enough to cross into propaganda).

-->
@Barney
@Ramshutu
@oromagi

Calling upon to the gods of this site. I don't know if this is illegal or not, so don't respond if it is, but what do you think of my arguments?