Instigator / Pro
10
1488
rating
2
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#2037

Artificial Intelligence on balance is biased against African Americans

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
27
Better sources
6
18
Better legibility
4
9
Better conduct
0
9

After 9 votes and with 53 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
7,500
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
63
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Description

No information

=>"When I debated someone who was a likely alt, even while I liked the quality I put in, I deleted it when they failed to rise above suspicion."

oh, you are a better man than I then. I would definitely have kept that one.

-->
@RationalMadman

Erik is someone who made it their mission to troll every debate in the challenge period, then started creating obvious alt accounts to continue this when restricted from accepting debates. I trust your intelligence to know he was active at the time. That you were harmed by the few minutes to recreate your debate rather than given a free win, sucks, but it still doesn't relate well to this debate.

If low effort wins are your concern, you have three from the original Erik account. You even got called out for farming him, but those debates remain in place.

As for if I'm corrupt... When I debated someone who was a likely alt, even while I liked the quality I put in, I deleted it when they failed to rise above suspicion.

-->
@Barney

that has nothing to do with it. I didn't know before I created my debate that ErikT would accept it. Checkmate and you are being corrupt but there is no doubt that Oromagi will always be favoured by corruption.

-->
@RationalMadman
@Barney

It may also seem relevant that truthbomb personally challenged me to this debate. He created an earlier public version which I commented on but did not accept.

-->
@Barney

No, I did not.

-->
@oromagi

Did you know prior to accepting this debate that Truthbomb would be banned?

-->
@Barney

No it isn't. Oromagi displays complete knowledge in Round 1 that it's a banned user he's debating against.

-->
@RationalMadman

That's also an apple to oranges comparison. Just look at the dates involved.

EricT, EricTbiggestfan, EricT2, Eric were all rather obviously the same person, with the alts deleted the same day they were created.

Nothing is preventing you from recreating any debates for topics you wish to argue.

-->
@Barney

In Round 1 he posts the ban, meaning even before posting Round 1 he knew.

-->
@Barney

My debate was accepted by an alt of ErikT and you deleted it. Where's the foreknowledge there?

-->
@RationalMadman
@oromagi

That is an apple to oranges comparison. This is a single debate, accepted presumably without knowledge that it would end in full forfeiture.

I did however delete all Truthbomb debates which were in the challenge period, to prevent free win farming.

-->
@Barney

You should delete this debate, I had 14 wins denied to me by bsh1 deleting me debating type1 alts.

Are machines inputted of racist information or they will develop so on their own actions?