Instigator / Pro
2
1474
rating
4
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#2830

Alcoholic products should be subject to plain packaging laws

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
0
10
Better legibility
2
5
Better conduct
0
5

After 5 votes and with 33 points ahead, the winner is...

fauxlaw
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
35
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Description

I will waive the first round.

-->
@fauxlaw

Very close debate. It was hard to vote

-->
@Sum1hugme

Yeah, I was sweating on this one.

-->
@Barney

re your #8, I may have caused some concern having professional background on the subject.

-->
@ILikePie5
@MisterChris
@Trent0405

Thank you for voting

-->
@fauxlaw

Well it was close

-->
@Barney
@Sum1hugme

Thank you for voting

-->
@Barney

Consistent with my personal mantra, I'll reserve judgment until my opponent's 4th round.

I am impressed by pro's dedication to applying plain packaging laws to his case.

Full disclosure: For roughly ten years, due to personally acquired skill, and by formal education in illustration and product design, in addition to my 30+ year corporate career in manufacturing process management, I was a structural product packaging and applied graphics engineer, so my knowledge on the subject is not at a layman's level. Though in an engineering discipline by organizational structure, I worked hand-in-hand with Marketing professionals. I have guilty knowledge of the subject.

Having accepted the debate, as is, I officially file the following disclaimer here, to avoid excess non-argument text:
Disclaimer: Pro’s Description is limited to a single statement to which I see no imposition requiring my compliance, to wit: “I will waive the first round.” I expect Pro expects my reciprocal waiver of the last round, but Pro makes no such demand. I therefore expect that Pro will either enter a first round text to the effect that he waives argument in that round, or will forfeit the round. I know it is a relatively popular tactic to waive rounds, i.e., the instigator waives first round, the challenger waives last round. However, I will hold to the current debate protocol of DArt that, “The argumentation is the stage when participants take turns publishing their arguments, the number of which is equal to the number of the rounds in the debate.” In other words, there should be argument [including rebuttal, defense, etc] in all rounds. [https://info.debateart.com/help/debates] I will comply with this policy with arguments/rebuttals in all rounds, having no compulsion to waive any round, regardless of Pro's actions.

Give me a day and I will accept this. 30,000? Why fill all 30,000 when you can do the job in 10,000?

-->
@fauxlaw

Take it. 30k limit will annoy me and am in 2 debates right now. I don't want it anymore

-->
@Bringerofrain

Oh! I almost took this myself, and at the last minute saw your comment. I'll gladly bow out, but I agree, the word count is a little restrictive and I agree. If Pro wants to limit to 1550 for their own arguments, so be it, but limiting serves no purpose other than taking interest out of the debate, which makes for boredom and consequently, perhaps fewer, if any voters.

Althea ugh I would appreciate if you made it 10k characters

-->
@Username1

Hey challenge me directly or let me accept please. I really want this one