Instigator / Pro
28
1763
rating
29
debates
98.28%
won
Topic
#3144

Resolved: The God of the Christian bible likely does not exist.

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
12
0
Better sources
8
4
Better legibility
4
2
Better conduct
4
0

After 4 votes and with 22 points ahead, the winner is...

Bones
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
6
1702
rating
77
debates
70.13%
won
Description

INTERPRETED RESOLUTION: The God of the Christian bible does not exist.

DEFINITIONS:

God - The omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and omnibenevolent being described in the Christian Bible.
Likely - to have a high probability of occurring/being true.
Exist - have objective reality or being

RULES:

1. No new arguments are to be made in the final round.
2. Definitions are agreed upon and are not to be contested.
3. Rules are agreed upon and are not to be contested.
4. Sources can be hyperlinked or provided in the comment section.
5. A breach of rules 1-5 should result in a 1 point penalty.
6. No Kritiks.
7. Fauxlaw cannot participate
8. A breach in rules 6-8 should result an instant loss.

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:

Fauxlaw violated terms of the debate.
Fauxlaw violated DART CODE of CONDUCT: If a member requests that you leave them alone, do so.

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 rule is dumb but I guess it does apply. Rule 7 was violated.

Cowardly rule but a rule nonetheless.

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:

Conduct:

The Debate was an instantaneous win for Pro due to Point 7 under Rules under description , "7. Fauxlaw cannot participate".

Moreover, Pro in their final Argument invoked Point 7 to confirm this violation. Therefore the Debate happened under immediate violation of the agreed-upon Rules under the Debate Descriptions.

All Other Vote Criteria are therefore are automatic points for Pro based on the above violation

Win goes to Pro.

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 shall vote.

First, arguments. The rules obviously exclude Fauxlaw from being a valid competitor so his existence would be considered forfeiture...right? Pro and Con argued semantically of whether if "Fauxlaw" is "fauxlaw". Look closely, Pro has a well-constructed argument regarding the English language, and that capitalizing the "F" in "Fauxlaw" at the start of the sentence doesn't refrain from it referring to the user "fauxlaw". This results in that fauxlaw not being able to win this debate regardless of what he said, and Con's only defense is that "Fauxlaw" isn't "fauxlaw", which is an argument already refuted by Pro.

There is no need to elaborate on anything else. Fauxlaw loses because he violated a rule which results in loss.