Kamala was only chose because she was black and a woman

You having a slight personal preference, is not the same as the magnitudes and types of offenses being different. While you can say there is a slight difference, the scale of how many rounds were forfeited is obviously equal.

You are talking about a PhD in psychology. Most of these people get a B.S. and then I end up hiring them for $12 an hour.

101:
Lara wants to know if the type of music a child listens to affects his behavior. She wants to make an experiment about this. After stating her question, she makes a background research about the topic. What should she do next?

Bruh, give me a random final exam from a psychology class in the final year. Let's see if I pass it

You don't even know that most Psychology degree don't really have a final exam. You have to know neuroscience. You have to know bio-chemistry. Then its all about going into research and writing a massive thesis, then clinical work and internships, then residency. Like a MD, you can't just take a test and start cutting on people.

Bruh, give me a random final exam from a psychology class in the final year. Let's see if I pass it

*I literally Google shit about psychology all the time and back when
*I was a big occultist I read all of Jung' s work.
*I think I could pass the final exam in a psychology class to earn a degree.
*I had a friend who is currently in the FBI, have me take his final criminal justice test. I scored 90%.
* I am literally more qualified to be in the FBI than actual FBI agents.

Thank you. That response perfectly illustrates your lack of qualification/education in human psychology.

I have also read the entire DSM5. Had to in order to try and figure out which thing is wrong with me.

I am basically like a black Frank Abignale

""I am pretty good with human psychology."
"false"

I literally Google shit about psychology all the time and back when I was a big occultist I read all of Jung' s work. I think I could pass the final exam in a psychology class to earn a degree.

I had a friend who is currently in the FBI, have me take his final criminal justice test. I scored 90%.

He would have failed. I am literally more qualified to be in the FBI than actual FBI agents.

"I am pretty good with human psychology."
false

" I think I got this one right."
false

"These assumptions seem permissible"
nothing outside of the text of the debate is permissibly relevant to judgement, for the same reason it would be wrong to judge an ice skating performance by race or psychological analysis or a cooking competition by race or psychological analysis. Of course, nobody believes that you did not already know the inappropriateness of your act. You do not act except to pervert the norm.

"It is typically worse for a patient to be late than a doctor, because the doctor's time is more precious and valuable."
False. Drs. set the time and place of appointment and so bear the greater burden. A surgeon who is 20 minutes could kill a patient. A patient who is 20 mins can only inconvenience a doctor.

"We make these assumptions all the time, "
false

"I see no reason not to conclude based on what 90% of debaters do"
false

"So you based your vote on the stories you tell yourself about participants in your head? "

I am pretty good with human psychology. I think I got this one right. Mall clearly spends a lot of time researching his debates

"Yeah, that wouldn’t cut it since that’s assumption of each debater’s behaviors prior to and post acceptance"

These assumptions seem permissible seeing as how universal both behaviors are to debaters. For example we usually hold door, because they are typically so unaware of their surroundings that if you don't the door will slam in their face and injure them.

It is typically worse for a patient to be late than a doctor, because the doctor's time is more precious and valuable.

We make these assumptions all the time, I see no reason not to conclude based on what 90% of debaters do, that con was fucked more by a forfeit than pro in this situation or it at least happens often enough that we should default to giving con the conduct points.

Technically I could have justified giving con argument points also if I felt like pro had the burden of proof and con had zero burden of proof.

So you based your vote on the stories you tell yourself about participants in your head? The story in my head about your vote is that it had more to do with the subject being a black woman and your determination to undermine such people whenever you think you can get away with it.

Yeah, that wouldn’t cut it since that’s assumption of each debater’s behaviors prior to and post acceptance. Using that as a basis for awarding points would not be sufficient.

Something along the lines of the fact pro likely had their stuff already researched prior to starting the debate and by forfeiting they wasted cons time forcing him to do dozens of hours of research.

It's possible con was planning to debate it when he accepted, so it's fair to assume he did some research immediately upon accepting the debate.

In essence the challenger wastes hours of his short life preparing for a debate that was never going to happen, while the instigator loses nothing

I explained that the magnitude was different. Thanks

For future reference, per the voting policy conduct awards are:
"Invalid if: Both sides had similar types and/or magnitude of misbehavior,"

I guess we don't have to really get our attention on this debate, considering Pro lost NO points at all. Is the win percentage THAT important to you people?

Out of curiosity, what would the justification have been?

The vote is justified. It's a forfeited debate and a judgement call. Unfortunately I was offline for like 5 days at least. I will explain it better next time I place a vote like this

Didn’t see it until yesterday, so unfortunately it came up too late on my end. I apologize for the delay.

for the record, I did report Wylted's bad vote a few hours before voting closed.

Realized I tagged your old account here, so I'm tagging the correct one here.

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: WyIted // Mod action: Not Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 1 to con
>Reason for Decision: See Votes tab
>Reason for Mod Action:
The voting period on this debate has ended and thus the vote can no longer be removed. If this had been reported during the voting period, it would have been removed because the voter does not explain how or why the instigator has some greater conduct demerit for having forfeited than the challenger who did the same. For future reference, weighing forfeits differently like this would not pass moderation.
**************************************************

Wylted voted at a point where I didn't look to think to report, please handle it.

Wow two hours. I would of liked to see some points.

“Black” is not judged by actual skin tone. It is about being an African American, which Kamala Harris is not.

Well, she also had some political experience. It's true that Biden before even making a decision publicly stated that he was searching for a woman instead of declaring he was searching for the person who would perform the job best