Instigator / Pro
4
1494
rating
5
debates
40.0%
won
Topic

This is the Best Online Debating Platform Ever

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
3
Sources points
2
2
Spelling and grammar points
1
1
Conduct points
1
1

With 1 vote and 3 points ahead, the winner is ...

Intelligence_06
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
Miscellaneous
Time for argument
One day
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
7
1661
rating
39
debates
79.49%
won
Description
~ 0 / 5,000

No information

Round 1
Pro
Thanks to Con for accepting the debate.

So, I'll keep this short since this is not an orthodox and important debate compared to what we have in hand in this massive platform.

WHY I THINK THIS ONE IS THE MOST AWESOME ONLINE DEBATING PLATFORM

Plenty of reasons. I have been an enthusiast in debating though I'm not much of a mainstream debater. So, I've looked forward to engaging in a sound and decent debating application for a while. Only one came into the light- Debate Wars found in play store. But that's not technically a debating app itself, rather a discussion platform with debating approach. It isn't for structural debates, is highly limited and broken since the developers dropped the game early. The only thing good with the platform was that it led me to here through one of its discussions.

Then I took it to here and the reason I was impressed by the site is that it's incomparable with any other platforms for debating including that app. I tried Debate.Org later and it was incredibly broken as well, I couldn't find a way to post my arguments in one of my debates.

The features are what make this site stand out-

1. Real-Time Structural Debate: One could engage in a realistic one-on-one debate in here and that too through a very wonderfully regulated system of rounds and other parameters; very much needed for a debater to condition himself to concentrate and give his 100%.

2. Forums: If not one-on-one, one could also take part in an ongoing discussion with my debating mood.

3. Involvement of Brilliant People: Ever since joining here, I could see some passionate debaters around including my opponent here. I've suited myself in a learning curve from all these people to improve myself.

4. Skill Development: Other than live debates of course, no other platform could really improve one's debating skills like this website is arranging for like studying more, gathering information, presenting in a persuasive way- all of these within a particular time limit have a definite scope for practical motivation in life for sure.

The only thing better that my opponent can bring out is the video debates but while they are online of course but that may count as a virtual replication of a live debate itself; but that doesn't help out certain introverts and ambiverts like me who'd like to engage in debates of various options as they choose to at the same time.

VOTE FOR PRO! 
Con
Pro has failed to define anything and hasn't even specified the Burden of Proof. As usual, if no parameters, the BoP rests on Pro as he needs to prove that This is the best online debating platform ever.

Con, on the other hand, needs to point out inconsistencies in Pro's argument that prevents This from being the best debating website ever.

1. "ever"

Let's look at the definition of "ever".

Ever: At any time, in any way, always
Pro has not specified the time period and/or the specifications that qualify for the term "any", so based on default, it will mean "of all times". Pro has to prove that This is the best debating platform of all time. It is Pro's fault for not giving parameters and if anything, he is arguing for "DArt is the best online debating platform now".

2. The former glory of Debate.org

DDO is dead, says everyone. However, the definition enables not now, but of all times, and DDO is once more glorious than DArt today. If "DDO is dead" is a reason then I could easily say the Roman Empire is never great because it doesn't exist anymore, which is false.

I will also give qualities from DDO. The first four are exactly the same as my opponent's as DArt is meant to be the successor of DDO, with spirits and people remain.

  • Real-time Structural debate. Like This site, DDO has real-time structured debates, even going further than this site, as there are tournaments in which people had to come up with an argument within 1 hour or less, basically like an online tournament except you are not seeing the other person. DArt here has the minimum argument time of 12 hours or half of a day, so unless all people are trying to build the live-debating atmosphere, you are going to sit in front of your computer for hours to come. Compared to not so many active debaters and only one single tournament ever taking place in the entirety of this site's 2-year history, DDO has massive numbers of users, which would mean more participation and more activity in debating and essentially more real-time structural debates. DArt's activity is nowhere near DDO's peak. 
  • Forums. Yeah, DDO's forums now is a hellscape wasteland. However, they were nevertheless much more active than what we have here now. With over 16,000 topics in just one single category! We have here only about 4,597 forum topics here, and that is the entirety of forum pages. DDO is 13 years old and it has 116,495 topics. DArt is 2 years old so divide that by 6.5, and you get 17922 topics per 2 years, which is about 4 times of DArt's productivity. This is also on top of the fact that DDO is dead for 2 years so on its peaks the topic rate is even higher back then! Compared to DDO's topic, DArt's forums can barely be considered alive. Let's also consider posts. DArt has 196,419 posts in 2 years. DDO has 3,056,498 in 13 years. On average it is 470230 posts per 2 years, which is over 2 times our productivity. How can we say that the forums on this platform are the best of all times when there is literally one 2-4 times more active per year, counting the dead ones??
  • Involvement of Brilliant People. DDO has much more brilliant people out there, only that they are no more active. Out of all people, we only have 11-page worth of debaters, whereas there are over 11 pages of debaters that have the tendency and skill to actually win the debates. People like RoyLatham and Lannan13 as well as Zaroette are no longer debating on this site, and they are still very brilliant people. There are over 100,000 people on DDO and the intelligent people are simply of more value. Seriously, there are lots of good debaters on DDO and only a fraction moved here. The course to improvement is literally the same when DDO is not dead.
  • Skill Development. DArt is using the same algorithm as DDO. When DDO is not dead you improve the exact same way. Isn't this a quality of literally every single debating platform that could and would exist? 
Now, some new ones.

  • Personalities. If there is a literal religion on DDO with actual popes and followers, you know how quirky the community is. DArt so far has no such communities and only one single debating tournament. Why would you even bother raising a 2-year-old community with one that is 13-year-old? The fact there is a weekly video series about absurd and funny quotes from an enormous community would be even more flavorful than the community we have now.
  • Unprecedented Charts. DDO was, and is, the most popular debating website according to counts of people, Even now you can see new users joining. DDO was unprecedented and was suddenly popular. There is nothing before it and it became such a big hitter. DArt is following DDO's footsteps, merely going the right steps and avoiding the wrong ones. The achievement of DDO made cannot be repeated. 
Overall, DDO, although not the best website now, is the best debating website ever in terms of all times. DArt has yet to reach DDO's former glory.

Vote CON!




Round 2
Pro
Con has brought some good points along the way. Here's what I think of them:

1. Con decided to focus on technicalities like ever. He claims I didn't specify what ever meant. So, if I specified this now Con would have to go with it; but I won't. I will represent DArt to be the best ever. 

2. He tried to rather compare one platform to the other which he believes is the best but I don't. So, in a nutshell he resorts to subjectivity throughout the argument. However, he disclosed some statistical significance to prove why DDO is the better platform and the best overall; so I will consider them along the way for my next arguments with addressing rebuttals.

ARGUMENTS & REBUTTALS

I will provide my rebuttals against his pointed arguments and they will serve as my arguments in this round.

1. Former Glory of DDO:

Timelessness & Consistency. When you add the word former to a term like glory it negates the timelessness of that correspondence. So, DDO has lost it's touch according to even you and your later remarks confirm that they are not in the state as they used to be in a dominant fashion. But with the way DArt has been approaching, it might be even bigger than what has ever been. Also Con tried to make it look like that being dead for 2-years only added to the arsenal of DDO for being the greatest platform ever. If anything, that just proves how inconsistent DDO has stood to be after all these years when it came to face real competition with the rise of other debating online platforms.

Competition.  When Con builds his argument through a 13 years old site against a 2 years one, pointing out simple statistics doesn't help. When DDO started, even as you stated that there was nothing before this and so it worked its magic up the way- isn't it simple? Since there were no other competition for them, it was basically a raw monopoly and they gained the popularity they deserved. But DArt, relatively way more modern in terms of this era has risen to its popularity competing with the veteran sites like DDO and other platforms. The credibility lies in competition through ages, not in pioneering to a drastical end.

Statistics. Con put forward numbers that are basically means or averages of a cumulative set of data. It is to be acknowledged that considering a fresher platform like DArt and a 13-years old legend like DDO, matching or mismatching cumulative data is a very poor demonstration of comparison. Since DArt is just rising through the competition, a slower buildup is pretty normal. The only way you could bring your house some points is if you played your cards in terms of data rates; so you'll have to show how persistent DDO has been throughout the first 11 years by plotting a curve and whether that curve was significantly outshining the last 2 years while DArt has been in the scene. Otherwise, your statistical performances seem to be a rather imposition of flawed technical approaches.

Draws. Con accepted that the forum of DDO has now gone to blow. In my statistical argument I just showed why his later statistic showdowns mean nothing unless of a rational approach. But he pointed out some good points in terms of debate settings such as more tournaments and an 1 hour timeline etc. While that looks intriguing, the sound of it leads from an utter desperation from Con. He is discrediting whatever DArt has now by an older and more engaging platform. Even that doesn't sound appealing to a passionate debater. An online debater has not got all the time to sit back and perform his debates by publishing arguments every hour. He would rather take part in a live debate to get it over with as soon as possible if that's what you're implying. In fact the whole point of the platform is to promote online debating as it comforts the debater. If he wants to finish it within an hour it's up to him, if he wants to take a day or two, the platforms are providing him that opportunity which is fine because of the daily affairs one goes through. So, your argument of better debate settings is refuted by characteristics of an online debate. In terms of tournaments, I concede with this one but that can't be used as an argument against the platform; rather could be a constructional advice. In fact with this timeline, sound voting system and better texting experience (Microsoft Word Style) of DArt, I believe it has drawn more and more debaters and admirers online and explicitly outdated DDO.

Debaters & Skills. The last two of my arguments were not against DDO in anyway but Con somehow made it look like DDO was offended by those remarks. My arguments simply advocated for DArt having some powerful debaters and a motivation for actual skill developments. But Con has twisted the narrations to suit to the only argument he could make out. However, if Con is implying DDO has better debaters around the site, that straightly asks for an objective ground which is not possible to provide nor does that mean DArt has any lesser of debaters.

2. Personality

Con asks "Why would you even bother raising a 2-year-old community with one that is 13-year-old?" - well I didn't and I wouldn't. My question though would be back to you- "Why would you?" Maybe he can answer this when DArt would be 13 years old; wait then DDO would be 25. Sorry but Con's sense of comparisons is compromised by blind following.

3. Unprecedented Charts

This argument has already been refuted by my Competition pointer. But I'd like to add a couple of rebuttals against it-

Pioneer vs The Best. Con seems to mix up between a pioneer and the best possible version of an element. He quotes "DArt is following DDO's footsteps, merely going the right steps and avoiding the wrong ones" . Doesn't that sound like merit of DArt to you? That doesn't mean DArt is a lesser or will always remain a lesser platform to DOD. If anything it makes them a better one considering all their right choices. DOD remains the pioneer of this territory but with the refutations to your claims it can be safely said that DArt may even surpass that legacy.

Prediction. Con states, "The achievement of DDO made cannot be repeated". Well, he doesn't necessarily know the future and from the likes of my arguments, we can predict how DArt may as well be even bigger. 

So. I conclude by refuting illogical statistical approaches and unnecessary comparisons of my opponent with my articulation of rational basis that DArt is the best there is and will surpass DDO to be the best platform ever for online debating.

Thanks! VOTE FOR PRO 
Con
1. Ever!

In round 1, Pro only compared this site with one and a half. Pro didn't even touch on the term "Ever", merely that DArt is good. I have no idea why I dropped that point, but Pro never even fulfilled his BoP in the first round.

Nevertheless, Pro this time touched on the term "ever", but this time, he still didn't define the parameters for "ever". Yeah, Without parameters it means of all time. Since I can't seem to find any debating platform on the internet before DDO, it is basically safe to assume DDO's existence is unprecedented. Pro needs to prove that DArt is the best platform at all times, in the past and even in the future. Of course, we don't need to prove the future because that would render Pro's statement impossible to justify. Let's just keep it both now and the past.

2. He tried to rather compare one platform to the other which he believes is the best but I don't. So, in a nutshell he resorts to subjectivity throughout the argument. However, he disclosed some statistical significance to prove why DDO is the better platform and the best overall; so I will consider them along the way for my next arguments with addressing rebuttals.
It is as if Pro didn't use subjectivity either. He did. Also, I just proved DDO is better than this one counting its overall life(not just now). The fact my opponent used "DDO is dead" as a reason is like the I the slight athletic boy is objectively a better athlete than the old Olympics Champion who'd be in a wheelchair because he is so old. Even then, the old Olympics competitor is probably objectively a better athlete within 14 years of age than me. Comparing his 90-year old body with my 14-year old body is just unfair. However, if we are really comparing who is objectively the better athlete, then we'd choose the peaks. My 14-year-old body is the best representation of my physical advancements whereas his peak would be around 24 years old or so. 

Timelessness & Consistency. When you add the word former to a term like glory it negates the timelessness of that correspondence. So, DDO has lost it's touch according to even you and your later remarks confirm that they are not in the state as they used to be in a dominant fashion. But with the way DArt has been approaching, it might be even bigger than what has ever been. Also Con tried to make it look like that being dead for 2-years only added to the arsenal of DDO for being the greatest platform ever. 
However, DDO at its most glorious moment is better than whatever we'd have over here. Pro doesn't seem to disprove any of it here. 

If anything, that just proves how inconsistent DDO has stood to be after all these years when it came to face real competition with the rise of other debating online platforms.
That is 13 years of consistency vs 2 years of inconsistency. DDO was rich and good until the spam bots invaded. Compared, DArt has only 2 years of consistency. The gloriousness is far from what DDO had. 

Competition.  When Con builds his argument through a 13 years old site against a 2 years one, pointing out simple statistics doesn't help. When DDO started, even as you stated that there was nothing before this and so it worked its magic up the way- isn't it simple? Since there were no other competition for them, it was basically a raw monopoly and they gained the popularity they deserved. But DArt, relatively way more modern in terms of this era has risen to its popularity competing with the veteran sites like DDO and other platforms. The credibility lies in competition through ages, not in pioneering to a drastical end.
Competing? No. DArt is more like hopping on the derailed train of DDO. DDO helps DArt more than it hurts it. Having one of the most popular debating sites literally helping its growth, then having such a small circle after 2 whole years with the peak of it being NOWHERE near DDO's, I don't see why DArt is overall better. This is the same reason the Holy Roman Empire, although more modern than the Roman Empire, is still less glorious overall. DDO is more ahead in format than DArt in terms of ratios. Just because the McLaren F1 cannot run faster than a Bugatti Veyron does not make McLaren F1 the worse car overall in terms of all times. Mclaren F1 is more advanced in tech at that time, much ahead in ratio than what Bugatti Veyron is compared to today's high-end cars.

In terms of tournaments, I concede with this one but that can't be used as an argument against the platform; rather could be a constructional advice. In fact with this timeline, sound voting system and better texting experience (Microsoft Word Style) of DArt, I believe it has drawn more and more debaters and admirers online and explicitly outdated DDO.
However, having a more modern vehicle does not make the site generally better. The Holy Roman Empire is more modern than the Roman Empire but nevertheless a less glorious state. Again, answered from above.

Con asks "Why would you even bother raising a 2-year-old community with one that is 13-year-old?" - well I didn't and I wouldn't. My question though would be back to you- "Why would you?"
I would not. Having the burden to prove something that is literally proven to be unfair would be unfair. Comparing a community of 2 years with a community at least 11 years old would be completely unfair and biased. However, the resolution compares the whole life of the community, and DDO's easily wins. You have literal religions and weekly web shows created just for that site. What does this site have over DDO?

 Prediction. Con states, "The achievement of DDO made cannot be repeated". Well, he doesn't necessarily know the future and from the likes of my arguments, we can predict how DArt may as well be even bigger.
For now, it is not repeated yet. However, using a community not done to compare one already done would be clear in the outcome, and the one with the BoP can't predict that DArt will surpass DDO. Who knows if the internet will be completely shut tomorrow? Pro can't possibly know that DArt will be even bigger.

Round 3
Pro
Nevertheless, Pro this time touched on the term "ever", but this time, he still didn't define the parameters for "ever". Yeah, Without parameters it means of all time.
Con has been bringing about the ever over and over again while I just cleared that I'd defend ever as it is. And even if he thinks I didn't clear it up then yeah, I was trying to prove DArt to be the best of all time.

Pro needs to prove that DArt is the best platform at all times, in the past and even in the future. Of course, we don't need to prove the future because that would render Pro's statement impossible to justify. Let's just keep it both now and the past.
Con implies that I have to prove DArt to be consistent with past and future in order to prove it to be the best of all time. Well, apparently, no. That's like saying Stipe Miocic cannot be called the best Heavyweight in the world since he didn't fight around the time of Randy Couture and so Randy Couture is the greatest Heavyweight of all time. Growing popularity and performances speak from themselves and DArt needs nothing more especially in the sense that DDO is dead and may never retain its "former glory" while DArt is an ongoing marvel in debating platform.

I have no idea why I dropped that point, but Pro never even fulfilled his BoP in the first round.
In my first round I generalized all the features of DArt to be the best on scene without going to detailed comparisons which I thought unnecessary on Con's part. But in the second round I cleared it up since DDO was brought up and also rendered Con's arguments to be flawed on multiple aspects. DDO once had it all and now in my opinion DArt has far surpassed that run (from a potential hypothetical standpoint) and will continue to do so even if that's at the expense of DDO being dead for 2 years.

It is as if Pro didn't use subjectivity either. He did. Also, I just proved DDO is better than this one counting its overall life(not just now). The fact my opponent used "DDO is dead" as a reason is like the I the slight athletic boy is objectively a better athlete than the old Olympics Champion who'd be in a wheelchair because he is so old. Even then, the old Olympics competitor is probably objectively a better athlete within 14 years of age than me. Comparing his 90-year old body with my 14-year old body is just unfair.
I didn't use subjectivity until the DDO argument brought up by Con himself which is logical though since he regards DDO to be the best and even then I proved with my rebuttals why DArt is no less and could be even more. But later he suggests with an Olympic analogy why the comparison is unfair and also uses the word "probably" to define objectivity on who the better performer was. If he's not sure what would happen at the peak of DArt, he should've called it a night for this "unfair" comparison.

However, DDO at its most glorious moment is better than whatever we'd have over here
Con still sticks to the "former glory" and totally misses the point of my Timelessness argument. Since its dead and almost done and it ceased to compete with DArt the past two years, bringing out "past" arguments seems childish.

Competing? No. DArt is more like hopping on the derailed train of DDO. DDO helps DArt more than it hurts it. Having one of the most popular debating sites literally helping its growth, then having such a small circle after 2 whole years with the peak of it being NOWHERE near DDO's, I don't see why DArt is overall better.
Con goes back to the pioneering vs the best argument basically saying DDO paved the way for DArt which I agree on and that having smaller 2-years old circle compared to a 13-years old circle makes it tougher for DArt to ever be in the same discussion as DDO. Again, another flawed and self-contradicting comparison by Con to make it look like newbies got no chance to improve even with higher rate of activities than the original.

However, having a more modern vehicle does not make the site generally better.
Everything has to evolve with time to generate the interest in introverts and people in general. That's basic marketing strategy. The argument was from my Draws argument where I pointed out why DArt has more to attract than DDO. So, yes it does better to draw debaters in with an advanced algorithm and atmosphere and less bugs unlike DDO.

Comparing a community of 2 years with a community at least 11 years old would be completely unfair and biased. However, the resolution compares the whole life of the community, and DDO's easily wins. You have literal religions and weekly web shows created just for that site. What does this site have over DDO?
So, Con agrees with his unfair comparisons but goes on to compare "life of the community" by which he means proper activity rates that still counts as a mismatched comparison for two sites built 11 years apart. As I pointed out in round two, if you're providing statistics, stop setting up cumulative datasets to analyze. Bring in relatable on-spot demographics of the growth rate while DArt was not there and plot it against what's happening after DArt came in. Otherwise it looks like a desperate attempt of pitting the peak of an old professional boxer against a peak of an amateur boxer who rose to be better at professional level at the right time. So, then the right way to measure them up is breaking down the career of that amateur when he goes pro at the peak against what the first pro was at that time.

For now, it is not repeated yet. However, using a community not done to compare one already done would be clear in the outcome, and the one with the BoP can't predict that DArt will surpass DDO. Who knows if the internet will be completely shut tomorrow? Pro can't possibly know that DArt will be even bigger.
That was my whole point that you can't predict the future. While I wrote "from the likes of my arguments, we can predict how DArt may as well be even bigger." while he used the term cannot as he says  "The achievement of DDO made cannot be repeated".

So, while I opened up a possibility for DArt going to be the best at the rate they're going, Pro right away dismisses the possibility of a future that he's unaware of and provides biased judgements through irrationally statistical and narrative comparisons. I believe I refuted them all with rationale and circumstantial presence of states of two sites.

Long Live DArt

Thanks to Con for taking the debate.

VOTE FORM PRO!
Con
Pro bears the BoP and thus has to prove that DART is the best of all time. He instead refuted me and created no productive case. Remember, Pro is supposed to make his case.

Con implies that I have to prove DArt to be consistent with past and future in order to prove it to be the best of all time. Well, apparently, no. That's like saying Stipe Miocic cannot be called the best Heavyweight in the world since he didn't fight around the time of Randy Couture and so Randy Couture is the greatest Heavyweight of all time.
I don't know who either of the two is, but the counter-case of that would be, "Because Brawn GP beat Ferrari in 100% of its participating seasons, thus Brawn GP is the objectively greater team compared to Ferrari." However, Ferrari is statistically the better team, having won 16 championships and 231 wins over its 70 years of history, whereas Brawn won only 8 races and 1 championship. If anything, DDO is more consistent, having 11 recorded consistent years whereas DART 2. Again, Pro's "predictions" are pretty much baseless since he has no ability to predict the future(even if he did, he provided no screenshots or anything, making it just claims). Pro has no disagreement towards my statistics on DDO & DART, so he admits that DDO is a much more elaborate community than this one, which would make DDO the better community. Pro is reducing the cases so it could make a "fair fight" and thus making DART winning but it is no fair fight and DDO is basically superior in every way(More average activity, bigger community, better personalities, etc) if the metric is of all times. Pro's case, again, will only stand if the metric is the past couple of years, but DDO was glorious even before then.

I will state it again: Just because a 14-year-old boy beat a retired world champion, doesn't mean the 14-year-boy is able to become the champion. Pro is comparing a weakened DDO with the skyrocketing DART, which is on unfair grounds.

The rebuttals above also work for similar statements. I will only state distinctive points from here and on.

Con still sticks to the "former glory" and totally misses the point of my Timelessness argument. Since its dead and almost done and it ceased to compete with DArt the past two years, bringing out "past" arguments seems childish.
As an F1 fan, I can confirm that Ferrari is doing extremely bad right now and AlphaTauri is doing very well. AlphaTauri got 27 pts whereas Ferrari got 0 on the latest race as of this stage of the debate. However, that does not make a privately-owned team that is the B team of a team that can barely even called a frontrunner, better than a 16-time world championship team. Comparing the valleys of a thing versus the peaks of another thing is not on equal grounds. Comparing the best of both things is a metric on equal grounds. DDO is much more glorious at about 2014 or so as literal TV shows and movies popped up, and DART's qualities now are just not enough to overcome it.

Everything has to evolve with time to generate the interest in introverts and people in general. That's basic marketing strategy. The argument was from my Draws argument where I pointed out why DArt has more to attract than DDO. So, yes it does better to draw debaters in with an advanced algorithm and atmosphere and less bugs unlike DDO.
Having a "better" method isn't better when this site only has hundreds whereas DDO has hundreds of thousands. DART's activity is nowhere close to DDO's average. DDO is outdated, but when it is still in date, it is more glorious. Using this argument, it is the same as saying South Korea is a better nation than the Roman empire because South Korea has more modern technologies, despite that the Roman Empire is more glorious and dominated a larger portion of the world. C'mon, this should be common sense, and more modern =/= better.

So, Con agrees with his unfair comparisons but goes on to compare "life of the community" by which he means proper activity rates that still counts as a mismatched comparison for two sites built 11 years apart. As I pointed out in round two, if you're providing statistics, stop setting up cumulative datasets to analyze. Bring in relatable on-spot demographics of the growth rate while DArt was not there and plot it against what's happening after DArt came in.
Pro should have done that knowing he's got the BoP. Instead, if Pro is relying on Con to do it, then he already failed to fulfill the BoP. Pro needs to do it in order to win.

So, while I opened up a possibility for DArt going to be the best at the rate they're going, Pro right away dismisses the possibility of a future that he's unaware of and provides biased judgements through irrationally statistical and narrative comparisons. I believe I refuted them all with rationale and circumstantial presence of states of two sites.
Pro cannot predict the future and he cannot rightfully say that "DART will be better". Pro relies on Con to provide data and that means Pro failed to fulfill the BoP. Vote CON guys. I believe I have proved that of definition, DDO is the more glorious out of the two and Pro gave no sufficient proof. Oh yeah, he did not use irrationally statistical and narrative comparisons in the later rounds because he gave no reasons at all to defend his position, which would already give him a massive parade of failure.

Overall, I have proved that DDO, on its best, is better than DART, on its best. DDO had a more active community and it is consistent in the community for 9 more years than this site, as to our knowledge. Pro cannot predict the future and it is no assuredness that DART will run better than DDO. DDO attracted more people and built up to a more vivid community and its best, presented by the phrase "ever" will be better than DART. Intelligence out and please Vote Con!