Instigator / Pro
11
1470
rating
50
debates
40.0%
won
Topic
#2060

Hot Dogs are not sandwiches

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
2
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
3
3

After 3 votes and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...

pense
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
18
1512
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Description

Hot dogs are signature American fast food dishes. We are not arguing about the hot dog with no bread.

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:

Hot Dog is not that British nobleman, so not a sandwich... Kidding!

I learned a lot about the history of hot dogs, so for that I am grateful. However this is a definition debate, and it's a lot easier to prove that something falls inside a definition, than it is specifically excluded by it. In practice, a third of people accept that it's a sandwich, even some tax codes ended up considering it that. So con takes the win.

A highlight from con was bringing up Subway. Pro counting with burritos was a wise move, but reviewing the photographic evidence, hot dogs look far more like the sub sandwich than they do the burrito. Of course them not originally being intended as sandwiches is noted, but much like the sub sandwich, things mutate with time and become other forms than they began.

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:

Nice debate!
The definitions presented are both ok. 2006's definition stated that a sandwich was 2 pieces of bread, which proves his entire argument. But, Con's argument provided the definition of "sliced bread". I take sliced bread to be completely sliced. Therefore User_2006 wins arguments.

Sources: (same as fauxlaw)

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:

Argument: Con offered an argument that went direct to dictionary definition of "sandwich," while Pro offered a wiki definition. Sorry for my partiality against wiki, but this debate is a perfect example why it should not be one's first-pass search for relevant material to source. Before reading the the arguments, I sought a dictionary definition, as well, using, per my preference, the OED, the which contained a definition similar to Merriam-Webster, as Con quoted, i.e., allowing for a "sliced bun." Points to Con

Sources: Both cited liberally, but Con's sources were more reliable than Pro's.

S&G. tie

Conduct: Tie