Instigator / Pro
11
1490
rating
6
debates
41.67%
won
Topic
#301

The word sock should be two words

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
6
8
Better legibility
2
4
Better conduct
3
4

After 4 votes and with 17 points ahead, the winner is...

Alec
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
28
1596
rating
42
debates
63.1%
won
Description

No information

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:

This is a troll debate. Con offered an actual argument, and justification as to why the words should remain. He gets the clean sweep, as this is a troll debate, pro could have won by out trolling - as Con has a better argument, supported his position, and took control of the debate by painting con into a corner he couldn’t troll out of: he gets the full win.

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 to Con. Pro stated that sock should be two words. Con stated that it should not be. Unlike Pro, however, Con actually stated why sock should remain one word.

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:

I don't think the source Con used was relevant to the debate. I don't care about water (wtf did water have to do with this?) I care about the debate at hand and how both sides approach is.

Pro is stating that chairs are concerned with the concern lacking towards words themselves, such as 'water' and 'sock'. Pro then says that because of this Sock would be better as 2 words and frankly was hinting at 'suck cock' if you follow how he was splitting the word up. It's a troll and a joke and the reason it lost is because Con points out that chairs seem to lack emotion and because people do care about words... Although the way he proved this was to only focus on water instead of socks, it still was sufficient to Kritik the angle that Pro took.

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:

I didn't see a terribly strong argument on either side for this, however, Con wins it by a small margin. Pro's arguments were confusing and unlikely, such as implying that chairs are somehow displeased with the current spelling of the word sock. Con rebutted this by pointing out that chairs have no emotions, and thus no rational opinion on how words are spelled. Pro also points out that the burden of proof is on Pro, since he is the one making the claim which needs to be proven.

Spelling and grammar to Con also, due to Pro kind of trailing off into unintelligible ranting during the final round.

But... aren't these the same two guys who debated the danger of ducks? They seem to have just reversed roles...