Instigator / Pro
15
1417
rating
158
debates
32.59%
won
Topic
#2469

Any Topic

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
12
Better sources
8
8
Better legibility
4
4
Better conduct
3
4

After 4 votes and with 13 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
28
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

Pro will waive round 1. Con will post a topic in r1, they are con and I am pro on the topic. They will define the terms and outline the ideas, posting arguments as they wish. Con will waive round 4. The topic must be debatable, not a truism. Pro can win the debate by proving his side beyond a shadow of doubt to be unarguable (preventing con from taking an incredibly biased topic).

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:

Pro said the topic was not debatable, prompting Con to explain how it could be debated. Pro dropped all of Con's arguments. This was a pretty clearly debatable topic. Pro failed to debate it and dropped Con's arguments that it was debatable. Arguments to Con.

There were no issues with S&G or conduct. I don't think the sources used in the debate really made much difference.

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:

By the debate terms themselves, the ban is a very contentious topic, and each point could have been argued easily. I.e The reasons for the ban.

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:

The ban was easily arguable by definition. PRO copping out on this topic did not fulfill the requirements of a PRO win.

"Pro can win the debate by proving his side beyond a shadow of doubt to be unarguable (preventing con from taking an incredibly biased topic)."

There was no such demonstration.

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:

The key thing here is if the topic of RationalMadman's ban was arguable, and it was for PRO. The moderators had a reason to ban him, and seldiora could've easily argued those points.

Concession.