Instigator / Pro
Points: 27

Con will win the debate

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 4 votes the winner is ...
User_2006
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Miscellaneous
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
Points: 25
Description
No more descriptions
Round 1
Published:
Opponent: 10 debates won
Me: 0 debates won

Opponent: 11 votes
Me: 3 votes

With these statistics, Con is obviously more skilled than me, and because of that, it is more likely that Con will win.
Published:
Hi, never done a debate like this one! Good luck!

Response to PRO's Argument
CON notes PRO only signed up to DebateArt on the 4th April 2020. [1]

This fact means PRO has never finished a debate and is currently in 11 active debates, 5 of which are in the voting period. PRO's skill has not yet been tested by this community and therefore the statistics are too small of a sample size to extract useful data, invalidating the argument.

Prior Knowledge
This debate is not on a geo-political issue, the only topics I have a reasonable level of outside knowledge in. This debate falls outside my sphere of knowledge meaning CON will be a lot weaker with this debate.

PRO, on the other hand, has a debate entitled "Pele is truly the goat" which is a debate that is in the same vain as this one with heavy empathises on the words of the motion. PRO has more experience and therefore is much more likely to win this debate, leading to the logical conclusion vote for CON, as CON should not win the debate, meaning an honest voter should vote CON.

Vote CON!


Sources
Round 2
Published:
Vote CON!
Just by this statement itself, which CON states that he/she wants the win. 

Now, fellow debaters aside CON him/herself, look at the title of the debate. Title of the debate is shown in the line below:
While CON advocates for voting himself, which seems right, it is not the best strategy, if I'd say. CON, is supposed to disagree about the title since the instigator, which is PRO, which is ME, is the one supposed to agree with the title. CON, on the other hand, is not supposed to agree with the statement. So, what CON is supposed to argue is that PRO will win the debate or that it will result in a tie, in which, he conceded.

And ah, sources: https://www.debateart.com/debates/1918/con-will-win-the-debate This is the source itself, look at the title, and look at both Pro and Con. 

Since I am proving that I will win, I did not prove what I am supposed to prove, thus I am the one to lose, and thus I DID prove what is in the title, which is that CON will win. 

Also, If you are checking my account: https://www.debateart.com/participants/User_2006 you will find that I have lost 100% of the debates that I have completed while only one in the progress of voting is winning, and 3 others I am losing. The win-lose percentage of PRO is less than CON. Since CON denied that he is experienced enough to debate about anything else, CON also conceded that since if he loses, Pro will win, which is one possibility that is desirable for him, which means he WON the debate, which is considered undesirable, which means that he did not prove what he is supposed to prove, and since I did prove what I am supposed to prove,  which is that CON will lose, which is not what I am supposed to prove, and thus I will lose and CON will win, and that is desirable for the terms of this debate.

It is also negated that this debate will end in a tie, which is undesirable for PRO consider anything but CON winning is desirable for CON at the stage of debating. Thus, a tie will favor CON. Since Ragnar in the comments section is a very active voter, there is little to no chance that he wouldn't vote here. Also, the fact that there are many more active voters would just mean that it is close to 0 in chances that no one would vote here.
Forfeited
Round 3
Published:
Con failed to prove what he tried to prove, which I think is on purpose. That means I will win, which means I did not prove what I am supposed to prove, which means I will lose, which means Con will win. Now this is a good end despite writing only a single paragraph.
Forfeited
Round 4
Published:
Con failed to prove what he tried to prove, which I think is on purpose. That means I will win, which means I did not prove what I am supposed to prove, which means I will lose, which means Con will win. Now this is a good end despite writing only a single paragraph.
Published:
CON has shown really bad conduct by forfeiting 2 rounds and therefore will not win the debate.

This leads to the logical conclusion that I have fulfilled my burden, of disproving the statement "Con will win the debate."
Round 5
Published:
Con had succeeded in proving what he had to prove, which means I will lose, which means Con will win, what I am supposed to do. 
Forfeited
Added:
--> @User_2006
The motion lied
Contender
#13
Added:
--> @Ragnar
Sorry, did not see your reply before close of voting. Did not affect outcome
#12
Added:
--> @fauxlaw
The only way is to delete the vote for you to recast it with any corrections.
Is that would you would like to do?
#11
Added:
--> @Ragnar
Ragnar, as noted in my post #9, I erred in actual assignment of points, contrary to my text. Can this be corrected? I don't know how.
#10
Added:
--> @User_2006
Yes, textually, I gave yo the point, but erred in the actual assignment of the point. I don't know how to change that.
#9
Added:
--> @fauxlaw
I think it is him who made the error, not me.
Instigator
#8
Added:
Reminds me of the "this sentence is a lie" paradox.
#7
Added:
Also title is a declaration, not a subject persay. So i advise unmoderated votes to con.
#6
Added:
There is an easy fix to this. Ie Troll debating. Problem solved
#5
Added:
bruh this hurts my head
#4
Added:
I'm so confused right now...
#3
Added:
Looks like it might be a draw
#2
Added:
Been a long time since I saw one of these. Good luck to both sides.
#1
#4
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con had a spelling error: "empathisis" point to Pro
Con forfeited 3 rounds - more than half - automatic loss according to DART protocol regardless of other points earned by Con
#3
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Like the previous voter has said, arguments are just a pile of paradoxes, and I shall not try to make sense of them. Conduct to Pro for less forfeiture.
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con forfeited majority of rounds. Conduct to Pro.
Arguments are clearly paradoxes. Like any good AI, I avoid thinking about paradoxes whenever possible. Arguments tied.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
"Are you still there?"
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Pro did indeed offer the better points and did not forfeit, but because he won, that makes Con correct, which then makes Pro correct, which makes Con correct, which makes Pro correct...In other words we are stuck in an infinite loop of both sides winning and losing. As a result they both have won this debate an infinite number of times. As a result, I declare it a tie.