Persons recently painted with green pigment foam (full resolution in description)
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 6 votes and 42 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- One week
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
Full Resolution: Persons recently painted with green pigment foam must stand around all odd-numbered SCPs at least two hours a day.
1) This is not a troll debate. The topic of this debate is in regards to the fictional incident outlined in the link below.
2) All events in said incident are by necessity somewhat open to interpretation due to the incomplete information present, however any interpretation made must not directly conflict with the larger setting of which this fictional account is a small part (hereafter referred to as the 'SCP universe'). Violation of this rule results in disqualification of the argument which committed said violation but not of the offending debater.
3) In the event that a violation of rule 2 is pointed out the debater making the accusation will be required to justify said accusation using only information available from the SCP wiki. No other source of information regarding the SCP universe is to be considered valid. A debater accused of violation of rule 2 may attempt to argue that no such violation in fact occured and if they do it is ultimately up to individual voters to decide whether a violation did in fact occur based on evidence submitted by the two debating parties and therefore whether the argument which did/did not violate the rule is/is not valid for use in determining the winner of the debate as per rule 2.
4) Lack of knowledge regarding the SCP universe as it pertains to rule 2 may not be used as an excuse to allow arguments which violate said rule.
5) The full resolution is an excerpt from the incident report mentioned in rule 1 and linked below. The resolution is to be regarded only in the context of the events of this fictional incident. No other interpretation of the resolution is valid.
This debate is being made under the 'philosophy' category because I suspect that the contender will try to defeat the resolution on ethical grounds. I am not limiting them to only making ethical arguments however. They are free to challenge the resolution on other grounds if they so wish.
If the contender does not agree with any rule above they are not to accept the debate but instead to inform me of their disagreement via PM or in the debate comments so that we can negotiate any changes they may desire. Acceptance of the debate without attempting any negotiation of the rules constitutes acceptance of all rules as they appear in this debate description. All agreed upon changes will be valid only once they are reflected in an editing of this description.
The contender may also propose to change the resolution to be any other 'suggestion' made or action taken by SCP-001-ex in the below incident report, however I the instigator reserve the right to choose whether I would be pro or con to any new resolutions agreed upon in such a way, just as the contender reserves the right to not accept the debate in the event that they suggest a new resolution to which I take the side (pro or con) which the contender had been hoping to take.