You pick the topic, I'll make it work.
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 20,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
Here's a chance for you to design the platform based on your topic selection.
We'll obviously have opposing sides.
Whatever topic you choose of course, it'll fit whichever side it falls on for you in tandem with the position preset .
Questions and concerns, leave a comment or send a message.
This debate forces Con to either unfairly have an extra Round of debate or unfairly debate where Pro can't reply.
due to this, we must consider the Round 2 arguments from Con:
GDP ranking being terrible for North Korea and it being joint last place with 16 countries (or 15 if it's 1 of 16) for civil rights.
I look into the sources that Con provides and on page 27 of the second source it backs up the 16 countries thing (so it was 15 others) and on the first source it was true that North Korea is 177th in GDP.
INTRODUCTION:
Pro creates the debate with the goal of letting Con pick the topic and then debating it. Con selected "North Korea is the best country in the world" as the topic, so the two now have to debate in one round only.
For the resolution that Con selected, he chose the position of "Con," leaving Pro with "Pro." So to win this debate, Pro must prove North Korea is the best county in the world, and Con must find an example of a better country. Since the selection of the topic happened in Round 1, they must prove their positions starting and ending with Round 2.
EVALUATION:
Round 1 (Pro): Skipped because of the reasons mentioned in the introduction.
Round 1 (Con): ''
Round 2 (Pro): Pro appears to be unhappy with Con's selection of topic and does not make an argument. Instead, he insults Con with reference to an earlier comment made by a spectator to this debate.
Round 2 (Con): Con argues that North Korea is not the best country in the world because it is 117th in GDP per capita and is among the worst 16 countries when it comes to human rights in the world.
While he does not bring forth a single example of a country better than North Korea, it can be implied by Con's argument that any country above North Korea in the GDP per capita ranking or not in the worst 16 countries when it comes to human rights is better than North Korea.
CONCLUSION:
This debate is in a "select winner" style of vote, so the only category that matters is Arguments. There are no points to be awarded for S&G, Conduct, or Citation.
Given that Pro made no argument, there is no way for Pro win this debate. However, if Con failed to meet the burden of proof the debate would go to a tiebreaker based on whether or not each side made any arguments at all. If there are no arguments made by either side, the debate is a tie.
Con made an argument that implies the existence of multiple countries superior to North Korea. If my assumption about this implication is correct, Con has fulfilled their BOP and is the winner of this debate. If my assumption is incorrect, the debate will go to the aforementioned tiebreaker.
Since Con made an argument, the tiebreaker, if needed, would go to Con and Con would be the winner of this debate.
Since both scenarios regarding whether or not Con fulfilled their BOP would result in a Con victory, Con is the winner of this debate.
Tip for Mall: If you're going to let your opponent choose the topic, you should make sure you know what topic they have selected before starting the debate. Otherwise, you get stuck with resolutions like this where you have a huge disadvantage.
Tip for Novice: If this debate were to have had more rounds, it would have been beneficial to your argument to provide at least one (preferably multiple) counties better than North Korea. That way, if Mall wanted to argue anything good about North Korea or argue that every country is equally bad (making it a tie between every country for the title of "best"), you would have specific countries where you could prove their positives outweigh their negatives more than what would be the case for North Korea.
It ultimately wasn't necessary at all for this debate, but my advice is good for a "just in case" scenario in the event you find yourself debating the same resolution again.
I felt like being high effort today
Novice is the troll, not Mall.
Are you serious?