Instigator / Pro
28
1468
rating
3
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#1755

Israel has no "right to exist"

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
6
51
Better sources
12
34
Better legibility
9
17
Better conduct
1
17

After 17 votes and with 91 points ahead, the winner is...

Barney
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Six months
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
119
1810
rating
49
debates
100.0%
won
Description

We will be debating Israels "right to exist". Does israel have a valid claim to the land?
Pro will be debating that Israel has no "right to exist"
and Con vice versa

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Full forfeit by PRO

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

See PressF4Respect

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Forfeit + Plagiarism

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Argument: Pro plagiarized whereas Con didn't. Points to Con.
Sources: Con used a variety of sources to a bigger extent.
S&G: Tie
Conduct: Forfeiture.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Full forfeit and a heavily plagiarized first round from the Instigator.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Full Forfeit.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Unreferenced arguments and plagiarism. Even still Con provided effective arguments, worthy of the points.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Argument: Con provided better arguments, but one missed, favoring Israel's right to exist is references in II Samuel 24: 18-25, and I Chronicles 21: 21-30 which documents David's purchase of the king's threshing floor for 50 shekels of silver. The King, Arauana, of the Jebusites, was willing to give the site, on Mt. Moriah, to David, but David argued to pay for it. No transaction since has paid David's descendants for the site .

Sources: While Pro offered sources in round 1, they were debunked. Further, Pro forfeited, losing any points otherwise.

S&G: Forfeiture

Conduct: Forfeiture

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

FF .

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

I humbly submit my vote...
I will keep this brief.

Better Arguments
- Con's arguments in Round 1 were not rebutted due to Pro's Forfeit in Round 2.
- Vote: Con

Better Sources
- Both had good sources
- Vote: Tie

Better Spelling and Grammar
- Both had good spelling and grammar.
-Vote: Tie

Better Conduct
- Pro forfeited Round 2
- Vote: Con

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

plagiarism and 50% forfeiture.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Full forfeit is bad conduct. Also, pro gets no points for plagiarized arguments.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

swagnar takes a w

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

FF+plagiarism=autoloss. Simple math.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro did plagiarism! That's poor conduct!

They also forfeited the majority of the debate! That's also poor conduct!

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Full forfeit and plagiarism

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Forfeit. Also, Con had a far better argument. This line sealed the deal: "Not to mention, the land was legally recognized as theirs by the former owners (and most civilized countries) in 1948 [6], rather than through war as pro claims." If the owners of the land recognized Israel as legitimate, then that's a closed case, since the owners can give their land to whoever they like. Pro forfeits, so he failed to refute this argument (Posting it in the comments section doesn't count). Conduct and arguments to Con.