This Debate is Stupid
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 4 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
"stupid" definition: having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.
This debate: this exact argument we are having
Burden of proof is shared
this debate is stupid because I can't even refute my opponent. Also the character limit is too short.
Accepting a debate is not stupid. An ability and desire to debate demonstrate real intelligence.
Did you come from DDO? Because this is how DDO verifies.
Cool, I thought it might involve a verified phone number or something.
Pretty much you need to complete two debates or play a game of Mafia, then you can vote.
How do I vote?
oh, not bad...
Okie, it is intentional.
100 characters?? That is not enough to unleash my true potential. I usually write 2000 characters in a normal debate on a good day.
Defining your terms is a very smart move in any debate...wait a minute...
Alrighty. Have fun!
This time, I am not being the semantic man I had been. Being pragmatic is rather useful in this debate.
Semantically. Every debate is stupid.
Having or showing a great lack of intelligence or common sense.
Only if we become omniscient is any debate not stupid. But then again, it would be stupid to have a debate if you are omniscient. Unless you just want a non omniscient being to realize they are stupid.
This would be better debate, i think.
I know this may seem like an easy win for me, but strong disagreement exists.
I suggest making it two rounds, as single rounds deny you any chance to make dumb replies, in turn automatically dropping every point con raises. Which yes is stupid, but perhaps too stupid to give you the win you seek.