Instigator / Pro
21
1485
rating
91
debates
46.15%
won
Topic
#197

Resolved: The US should cut alliances with Saudi Arabia

Status
Finished

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

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

After 3 votes and with 16 points ahead, the winner is...

David
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
8,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
5
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

== Structure ==
1. Opening arguments
2. Rebuttals
3. Rebuttals
4. Closing

==Rules==
1. No forfeits
2. Citations must be provided in the text of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final speeches
4. Observe good sportsmanship and maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling
6. No "kritiks" of the topic (challenging assumptions in the resolution)
7. For all undefined resolutional terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the logical context of the resolution and this debate
8. The BOP is evenly shared
9. Rebuttals of new points raised in an adversary's immediately preceding speech may be permissible at the judges' discretion even in the final round (debaters may debate their appropriateness)
10. 8000 characters maximum
11. Violation of any of these rules, or of any of the description's set-up, merits a loss

I am not reporting the corrupt votes on this corrupt debate because of my corrupt memory.

-->
@Username

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Armoredcat // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: 4 points to Pro for arguments and conduct

>Reason for Decision: Con conceded the debate, FF´ed all the rounds, and he did not present an argument, so arguments and conduct to Pro.

>Reason for Mod Action: Concessions are not moderated unless the voter voted for the conceding side, which he did not do.
************************************************************************

-->
@Alec

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Alex // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: 5 points to Pro for arguments and sources

>Reason for Decision: Pro had an argument and used sources.

>Reason for Mod Action: Concessions are not moderated unless the voter voted for the conceding side, which he did not do.
************************************************************************

-->
@RationalMadman

Truth be told I don’t really believe the position I argued for. I wanted to try a devil’s advocate/foreign policy debate.

-->
@David

I think I laughed hardest at the fact that even though you're Jewish, you want the only alliance that has single-handedly ensured Israel isn't blown to smithereens to get cut. Was a good laugh.

-->
@David

nope

What did you think of my arguments

-->
@RationalMadman

It’s alright. I hope we can debate again sometime

-->
@David

All I can say is I learned alot about you as a person from your reaction here.

Next time I won't wait until the Sunday, I will have a pre-prepared insta-post.

-->
@David

I forgot about this debate, you can have the win I can't produce something good in 28 minutes.

-->
@RationalMadman

Fair enough. I like depth.

-->
@David

Okay but my speech is going to be a lot longer than that. There's a huge abyss if depth to this.

-->
@RationalMadman

Mind waiting till Sunday to post arguments?

-->
@RationalMadman

Lol. I think you're a fairly solid debater. Though to be fair the majority of your debates were with Type1. Anyone who loses to them should feel bad

-->
@David

Because I suck but my rating doesn't? ;)

-->
@RationalMadman

Thanks so much for accepting! I've been really wanting to debate you on a topic