The Olympics should be abolished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 16 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
No information
"by the choice of one side to miss at least 40% of the debate, the requirement [to consider arguments] ceases."
Pro has given a reasonable argument stating what Olympics and why it should be abolished but forfeited the very next round. However Con has stated the many beneficial of the Olympics stating to how it benefits us to there being competition leading to the forfeiture of pro.
Pro identified the first argument and then forfeited next round, instigating a debate and then not debating counts against pro for conduct, Pros "first" argument was an argument for not hosting the Olympics rather than an argument for abolishing the Olympics. Cities "bid" for the opportunity to host the Olympics, and therefore, have done a cost/benefit analysis that favors hosting, no argument for abolishing the Olympics was even presented.
Single round, with con's case wholly dropped, reduces this to a foregone conclusion.
FF please vote, TY.