All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
With 4 votes and 23 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
God's gift to the civil courtroom
Virtually an FF, laziness and Round 1 forfeit from Pro give Con the conduct.
Pro doesn't address anything in Con's arguments, in fact he makes it clear that this debate was intended as satire on the part of Pro. While playing devil's advocate is acceptable, it's not acceptable to completely break out of character and virtually concede like that.
Only Con used sources.
Argument: Pro offered virtually no argument, but for libelous attack against Nunes. Conoffered reasoned arguments. points to Con
Sources: Pro offered no sources. Con, well eresearched and cited sources. Points to Con
S&G: The sheer volume of Con's arguments offered greater risk of S&G error. Points to Con
Conduct: Pro: disrespect to Nunes, for wasting Con's time with a debate Pro clearly instigated, but to which contributed noting of a positive argument to support his case, and to me for having to review childish slurs.
The only real subject this debate came down to was the age of the guy. Pro asserts he's a child, con proves (with sources) he is middle aged. Conduct for forfeiture.
Pro dropped all of Con's points without making a legitimate argument himself. So Con wins arguments.
Conduct to Con because Pro forfeited.