Con has got to be the Best Debater Pro has Ever Seen
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 8 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 1
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 500
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Pro will open up by saying "That's got to be the best debater I've ever seen."
Con may only respond by saying "So it would seem."
Y’all are all beautiful and don’t let anyone else tell you otherwise
Con conceded to Pro's resolution:
"Pro will open up by saying "That's got to be the best debater I've ever seen."
Con may only respond by saying "So it would seem.""
This is what occurred in the debate
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way that a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyways. Because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.
I am going to explain something here. Pro says 'that' and doesn't say 'Con'. 'That' could be referring to any debater he's seeing at that moment in time'.
This debate's description is trolling. To create spam guaranteed tie is trolling and toxic if others catch on to it being okay. Pro loses because of grammar. Con only had to admit it seemed that way so even if Pro had said 'Con' instead of 'that' I don't get how Pro won this debate.
Certainly, the shortest-ever debate of 15 words deserves some credit. Extra points for sticking to the script.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMspqVbfQ1I
Pro limited Con's response and Con confirmed Pro's assertion. Therefore, Pro successfully defends his premise.
There was some clash back and forth, but at the end of the debate I was left wanting by both parties. I don't think Pro met his burden of proof beyond his assertion, and con came back with a one-liner. Good effort debaters!
Oromagi should have accepted this.
I wish that to be true.
Plot twist: 25 years into the future, the resolution is true, which causes a multidimensional time paradox in the mind of the evil AI ruler, ultimately saving humanity.
would you like to vote on this debate?
Craziest back-and-forth I have ever experienced.
vote bump
Your RFV killed me!
**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Safalcon7 // Mod action: Not Removed (non-moderated debate)
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 3 to pro.
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
This debate clearly falls into one or more category of non-moderated debate, and the vote does not seem to be cast in malice. Therefore, no intervention is merited.
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#non-moderated-debates
**************************************************
Thank you.
Sorry but I kind of conceived the debate that way. Seeing there's no room for deleting my vote, you can report on my vote and probably the moderators will decide what to do about it.
Yes. But this debate I already knew I would win, seeing the debate rules.
By taking any debate, especially a joke debate, you run the implicit risk of losing.
I think, but that doesn't matter except for aesthetic imo
Isn't the debate counted into the W/L ratio?
don't be that way. This is all in good fun.
Actually, if you are willing to give an actual vote you have to vote on me.
""failing to affirm the resolution means pro loses by default."" - voting policy
PRO offered no arguments or evidence. Therefore, he looses by default.
To trap Ragnar or Oromagi to their defeat.
well DUH, why'd you think this was unrated 500 character one round debate?
Easy win.
Unless PRO hasn't noticed himself he has lost by definition.
: )
Ah, a man of culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMspqVbfQ1I
Lol I thought you made a new account to try harder at winning?