Instigator / Pro
3
1417
rating
158
debates
32.59%
won
Topic
#2024

This Debate is Stupid

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Winner
3
9

After 11 votes and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...

User_2006
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
1
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
1,000
Voting period
Six months
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
9
1470
rating
50
debates
40.0%
won
Description

stupid: duke pasur ose treguar një mungesë të madhe inteligjence ose sens të përbashkët.

rules: يجب أن تكون كل جملة حجة بلغة مختلفة غير الإنجليزية.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I speak primarily English, and this website is primarily in English. The rules being in a different language means they don't apply. At this point, Pro's case is just nonsensical. That means Con is the only debater with something on the flow, therefore, they win the round.

Pro: Tips to get better, put the rules in English. It would've been a clear win for you.

Con: Tips to get better, follow the rules. If someone applied the rules, you win. If someone doesn't, then Con wins on presumption. It's a win-win scenario for you.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

CON managed to illustrate how PRO's sense of humor actually correlated to a degree of intelligence.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

There is some sense in CON's arguments thus this debate is not stupid.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I don't quite understand what point Pro was trying to make. Even if the reader could comprehend all the languages posted, they would need to admit that this is an English speaking website and that basically Pro's Round equals posting nothing at all.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro used reasons well Con was too focused on semantics and tiny details.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I'm making a meaningless vote to contribute to the stupidity of this debate. If this helps Pro's case, try not to hurt your brain about it; it's not quite a paradox, only nonsensical.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

By speaking 13 different languages, including what seems to be Egyptian hieroglyphics, Pro has failed to give proof of the stupidity of this debate, because by forcing me to Google translate every single statement, he has shown that there is an intelligent process going on in this debate.

Win to Con for pointing that out and presenting 4 relevant substantives.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con prevented Pro from meeting his burden of proof as the claimant. Con points out that setting up this debate and making a gibberish argument is smart, in a way. Obviously, another way to look at the matter is that this debate is a colossal waste of time and energy, thus making it stupid.

But since Pro didn't do much work to make me prefer the latter interpretation over the former, he fails to meet the burden of proof. Con wins.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

With some facility with recognizing the ciphers of a number of languages I do not understand, and having fluent facility with four, including ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs, I can attempt translation by an internet translator once having nailed down a few of the foreign languages offered by Pro, sufficient to conclude that, indeed, the debate is stupid, as each phrase, though loosely related to relative lack of understanding, expresses an element of lack of sufficient intelligence to debate, and, therefore, met the demand to demonstrate the proposal of the debate.
Con, however, merely by Pro's use of several languages, argued that Pro exhibited intelligence. But Pro did not imply intelligence as a factor, having or lacking it; but merely that the debate was stupid. It is.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I think Con needs to work on being less confrontational in their narrative. That being said Con brought up great points. The translation and decoding required is a form of intelligence. Con did not properly prove that intelligence or being intelligent is an antonym for stupid, however, it would be safe to say that unproved contention would not be in widespread dispute.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con proved that there is some intelligent process that went into the debate (as given with his point on the translation).