Instigator / Pro
9
1266
rating
119
debates
15.97%
won
Topic
#194

The universe is based on binary code

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
9
Better sources
6
6
Better legibility
2
3
Better conduct
1
3

After 3 votes and with 12 points ahead, the winner is...

sylweb
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
21
1534
rating
7
debates
78.57%
won
Description

No information

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:

Conduct to con for pros forfeit.

After “surveying the arguments”, it seems that pro didn’t provide a meaningful argument, and instead his opening argument appeared to be more of an incoherently rambling opinion: there was little in the way of an attempt on pros part to establish his position logically, or provide any walk through of the supporting logic. Con arguments are therefore more convincing because he correctly points out how con falls well short of his burden of proof. That some is sufficient to win the debate. Con goes further, by pointing out how the tenuous argument pro made was wrong: pointing out that the 1:0 alternatives are arbitrary and subjective.

Grammar and spelling go to con too: “Every something has to have something at it's core that makes it something”, “to it beyond it's discernible” - both should be its. General poor use of grammar, that make the arguments made hard to follow eg: statements like “many intellectually smart people” (redundancy), “How can I possibly know this you might ask?” Too short, needs a comma between this and you, breaks up the flow of the debate, and the choice of grammar in examples such as this makes it harder to read.

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 surrenders all arguments and basically CON wins bye extending all of dropped case

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:

Con made significantly less grammatical mistakes in their arguments. While Pro failed to provide proof of his/her claims. Pro then proceeds to imply that they are correct by attempting to convince Con that they have status in this field. I for one fail to see any conduct that indicates Pro is a professor of any type especially one employed by CERN.