Instigator / Pro
27
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Topic
#3338

[February Tournament 2022] The majority of the world is better thanks to Covid.

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
3
Better conduct
3
3

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

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
15,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
10
1518
rating
15
debates
40.0%
won
Description

Rationalmadman vs Computernerd: [Round 2] [February Tournament 2022]

Definitions are as follows:

---------------

'thanks to' is a colloquial phrase that doesn't literally require people to thank nor does it imply we ought to feel genuinely grateful, it means that the benefits and/or drawbacks that Pro and Con will respectively present are due to Covid (overall).

~

'majority of the world' means that most of Earth (primarily its human population). It can include other aspects but ultimately this is about the world as a whole, which both sides agree includes humans and in this debate humanity is certainly included as a factor.

~

'better' means
'in a more suitable, pleasing, or satisfactory way, or to a greater degree'
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/better

'more attractive, favorable, or commendable
more advantageous or effective'
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/better

--

The debate structure is Round 1 is opening arguments and should not have many rebuttals from Con to Pro, if Con violates this then voters should consider to penalise for it.

Round 2 should be rebuttals, no new arguments are allowed but new evidence and rebuttal-supportive angles are permitted.

Round 3 is conclusions and defense against rebuttals as well as reinforcement of rebuttals.

-->
@Thoth

Obviously civid was shit in reality. You can't debate Pro on this topic without tactical twisting of context.

-->
@Novice

Not a challenge, just beaten you.

Didn't expect any positive feedback, I went to sleep thinking of myself as a terrible debater. Shame I messed this up, but failures are a learning experience.

-->
@Barney

Thanks for your thoughts.

-->
@Novice

He's a decent challenge, and much more experienced than I am. Plus, I debated this topic really badly.

-->
@ComputerNerd

I'm not kidding, you were destroying this gentleman, you really should not have conceded.
I honestly think you had the better side of the resolution, so it should have been an easy win for you, considering that RM isn't exactly a challenge.

-->
@RationalMadman

Projection refers to unconsciously taking unwanted emotions or traits you don't like about yourself and attributing them to someone else.

I think it is unfortunate that you lost the debate about youtube dislikes, my condolences.

-->
@ComputerNerd

If arguing this again, I really suggest focusing on that good ol' death toll. Even a statistically insignificant number of dead people, has a staggering intrinsic weight. Whereas saying millions of children suffered (should have been billions), doesn't have nearly the same impact. Granted, harm to children could be bridged to massive long term harms in science if we have a dumb generation.

-->
@Novice

I literally have an example of you doing it and can show anybody the provocation and the ridiculousness of your RFD.

If you think ComputerNerd outdebated me in this debate, you have no idea what debating is and probably just think it means being on the right side of it as opposed to having debated one's side better.

-->
@RationalMadman

We all know you bring your personal issues into the voting tab, to purposefully make others lose.
I, for one, do not share this characteristic, so I vote fairly only considering the debate.

-->
@Novice

No, he wasn't. I did anticipate your spite-vote coming though.

-->
@ComputerNerd

You were literally destroying your oponent despite not arguing particularly well, and you condeded?

-->
@RationalMadman

Oh, I didn't see the concession.

-->
@DeprecatoryLogistician

This ended in a Round 3 concession anyway, which I didn't exactly expect before I pinged you guys to vote.

-->
@DeprecatoryLogistician

The likelihood that your vote is corrupt increases, not decreases, the more that you allow previous vote scores to determine whether you bother to land your vote a certain way or not.

The least corrupt way to vote is to vote hard and fast, before you know or care how likely or unlikely it is that this debater will beat you in the finals and how well they sway voters.

-->
@RationalMadman

Ok, I can vote, but I will try to let other people vote first as I probably have a slight conflict of interest.

-->
@ComputerNerd

“Everything in life can be taken away from you and generally will be at some point. Your wealth vanishes, the latest gadgetry suddenly becomes passé, your allies desert you. But if your mind is armed with the art of war, there is no power that can take that away. In the middle of a crisis, your mind will find its way to the right solution. Having superior strategies at your fingertips will give your maneuvers irresistible force. As Sun-tzu says, “Being unconquerable lies with yourself.”
― Robert Greene, The 33 Strategies Of War

“Always try to lower the other side’s sense of urgency. Make your enemies think they have all the time in the world; when you suddenly appear at their border, they are in a slumbering state, and you will easily overrun them. While you are sharpening your fighting spirit, always do what you can to blunt theirs.”
― Robert Greene, The 33 Strategies Of War

-->
@RationalMadman

Disregard. It's a concession.

Might vote by Thursday.

-->
@Tejretics
@Mharman
@oromagi
@Intelligence_06
@DeprecatoryLogistician

Please be ready to vote, it's only a 1-week voting period so start reading it now and mentally preparing your RFD's at least partially.

-->
@Lunatic
@Barney
@Vader
@whiteflame
@Discipulus_Didicit

Please be ready to vote, it's only a 1-week voting period so start reading it now and mentally preparing your RFD's at least partially.

-->
@RationalMadman

Apologies. I did that to get a reaction. Forgot to turn it off.

thanks for blocking me too then?

-->
@RationalMadman

Thank goodness, I really thought I did something wrong. Thanks for telling me.

@computernerd
somehow you were blocked by me I think I pressed wrong on my phone or something, I don't remember blocking you at all.

I am not sure what to say other than I hope you can realise it was a mistake. I noticed when I randomly clicked your profile within the last hour.

-->
@ComputerNerd

Debate over "better" are not quantifiable. Nevertheless, good luck to you.

-->
@Athias

Me and RM decided to agree on semantics, so that’s not a problem.

-->
@ComputerNerd

If I were you, I would never have accepted the terms of this debate. Because essentially you're debating over the description, "better," rendering votes a tally of who agrees with the description. Thus making the four point voting system irrelevant. Not to mention, by accepting the debate, you accept RationalMadman's definitions. I suspect your novelty was taken advantage of.