Instigator / Pro
20
1535
rating
7
debates
64.29%
won
Topic
#38

Governments should require that meat packaging include ethical warning labels

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
9
0
Better sources
6
4
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
2
3

After 3 votes and with 10 points ahead, the winner is...

Tejretics
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
10
1530
rating
6
debates
66.67%
won
Description

"Ethical warning labels" refer to "labels that inform consumers of the physical and mental suffering involved in producing the animal products they are considering buying."

No new arguments in the final round. Character limited to 10,000 characters, i.e. if a post exceeds 10,000 characters, it is an auto-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:

Con concedes

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:

Con forfeits and Pro provides sufficient reason to have the packaging.

The approach Con should have taken is the nihilistic, meat-endorsing one. This is actually a debate where the objective truth is Con but subjective truth for a non-psychopath is Pro. This comes down to how much we care about animal suffering.

Con could have won but I will respect their right to forfeit.

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:

Thoth conceded the debate.