Instigator / Pro
15
1417
rating
158
debates
32.59%
won
Topic
#2580

Pro will be Victorious in This Debate Despite Waiving Rounds 2~5

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
15
Better sources
6
10
Better legibility
5
5
Better conduct
4
5

After 5 votes and with 20 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
1,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
35
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

Victorious: achievement of mastery or success in a struggle or endeavor against odds or difficulties

Pro must prove beyond a reasonable doubt he will be victorious despite waiving rounds 2~5.

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 let himself get baited into not waiving. While the quotation later I could forgive, both the declaration of victory (a clear assertion instead of waiving) and "Is failing to present an argument same as refusing to present evidence for argument? My refusal here stands, self-evident." are not rounds wholly waived.

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 did not actually waive, thus failing to fulfill his pre-determined win condition.

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: Pro begins an argument in R1 that s not. Inaction cannot be seen in any perspective as an action. The lack of action is not acting, but refusal to do so. The argument declines from there through the balance of rounds. Pro's resolution, successfully rebutted by Con in R1, R2, failed completely in R3 when, contrary to the resolution, pro did not waive, but offered argument. Con rightfully rebutted in R3 that Pro had thus failed to achieve a win. Plus, Con successfully argued in R2 that Pro's waivers met the condition of forfeiture. One might conclude that in R4, Pro actually offered an argument, relieving him of the Conduct charge levied by Con in R3. However, the sense of the quote, which Pro evidently believes, is that offering argument, by way of a question, is still a waiver." Unfortunately, an argument is not limited to declarative statements; questions do pose an argument. That Pro believes the quote, however, was evidence of believing to waive the Round. He must be given his due, as presenting a round of waiver. Therefore, Con's argument of conduct failure applies. Points to Con.

Sources: Pro offered a single source, but from an unrecognized and unverifiable source. Further, the quote presents a conundrum which is not true, but which Pro attempts, and fails, to demonstrate as true. which fails the notion of adequate sourcing. Cons' multiple sources firmly support his arguments. Points to Con.

S&G: tie

Conduct: Pro loses conduct points for waivers. Points to Con

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 fails the debate out of topicality - that their argument does not fit within the resolution or breaks the resolution. By not waiving every round after the first, they necessarily lost the debate.

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:

While Con's arguments were more targeted, Pro would have had a very compelling case had he actually waived. Not only did Pro fail to waive, but his remarks in the rounds could be construed as bread crumbed arguments. Con necessarily wins. Con's sources were also more constructive to the debate and topic at hand.