Instigator / Pro
26
1500
rating
4
debates
25.0%
won
Topic
#4240
WeaverofFate is a literal walrus
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
6
12
Better sources
10
10
Better legibility
5
5
Better conduct
5
5
After 5 votes and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...
Bella3sp
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 1
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
32
1524
rating
53
debates
75.47%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Pro
#1
You see, I have secretly been a walrus this whole time. I have fooled you all with my walrus hands.
Exhibit One:
The Beatles didn't write this song, I did, because I am indeed a walrus.
Exhibit Two:
Literal selfie of me
Exhibit Three:
Can you truly prove I am not a walrus? You cannot, my walrus powers have already begun to work. You will now provide me with fish. Thank you.
Con
#2
Thanks WeaverofFate,
Preamble:
I will be using evidence to prove that WeaverofFate is not a literal walrus. This conclusion will be supported by two contentions, as of which will be divided into its own sections.
Burden of Proof:
Pro needs to prove that he is a literal walrus.
All con needs to do is prove he isn't a walrus or disprove of all his arguments.
1. Weight
- P1: Typing
P1
It would be impossible to type while being a walrus. It's hard enough for some humans to type on computers or phones, but a walrus? It would be impossible with the width of the flippers. They would be hitting other keys, and walrus flippers aren't like human fingers.
Here's a picture of walrus flippers:
If needed, you can use your own fingers to see the difference.
Furthermore, there have been no reports that I have seen a walrus typing.
2. Description
- P1. Culture
P1
Your description states:
"- Traditional Christian
- Heavily Authoritarian"
Don't get me wrong, I know what being a Christian entails however I looked it up just to prove it further. It states, "A Christian is someone whose behavior and heart reflects Jesus Christ." (3)
Your description says it all.
Rebuttals:
Exhibit One:The Beatles didn't write this song, I did, because I am indeed a walrus.
The Beatles did in fact write this song. For example, the song called, "I Am A Human" by Ziggy Marley (4) shows that even though I am a human, this song is not made by me and is made by Ziggy Marley.
Pro has no proof that the pictures are themselves. This could be someone else's photo or photoshopped.
Also, I caught you... :)
: an image that includes oneself (often with another person or as part of a group) and is taken by oneself using a digital camera especially for posting on social networks
1: a person's self : one's own self —used reflexively as object of a preposition or verb or for emphasis in various constructionsIt is important to have good feelings about oneself.2: one's normal, healthy, or sane condition or selfthe need to protect oneself from danger
Therefore, you have even confirmed it yourself. You are a person!
Exhibit Three:Can you truly prove I am not a walrus? You cannot, my walrus powers have already begun to work. You will now provide me with fish. Thank you.
Can you truly prove that you're a walrus? You cannot, as I have disproved your arguments.
Depends on what you consider "powers". But these would most likely be referred to as "strengths".
--
Conclusion:
WeaverofFate is not a walrus and that has clearly been proven through my rebuttals and my claims.
Sources:
I would write my sources, but i'll write them in the comments due to lack of time. I'm attending a dinner with a couple of people for an event which means i'll write the sources in the comments within a few hours.
--
Since this is the last round, you will be dropping my arguments.. but either way, thank you. I'm testing new formats for debates (thanks to Barney) and this has allowed me to use this debate as testing. Hope this is likewise helpful to you regarding your voting qualification.
Vote Con.
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:
better proof
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's reasoning was far more compelling-
Flippers can't type, disproved claim of owning Beatles song= compelling
self/selfie argument not as convincing.
Args to CON
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:
non sequitur troll debate. as someone who has pretended to be an animal in the past, i appreciate weavers siliness.
the attempt to make the debate serious by bella only serves to amplify the outrageousness of weavers claims.
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 made me laugh more.
Had con treated this as a reverse truism, I’d vote against them. Treating it as serious but in a funny manner, that is my type of humor.
The flippers being bad at cellphones, with pictures of them really helped. As did the question if pro may have photoshopped their photos… I’m thinking pro is most likely actually a narwhal.
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:
Finally, Weaver's voting privileges are back.
Walruses love all people except the anti-christ.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4052-cars-are-harmful-and-should-be-banned-before-more-people-die
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3701-male-homosexuality-is-curable
Wylted and Best.Korea are the masters of comedy debates.
Thanks for your vote. At least I know my humor wasn't totally invisible.
I could quite frankly care less on disappointing someone unless its one I look up to with high standards. And even if it was someone I looked up to, it's not the end of the world and I won't be taking their opinion to the top. I still will consider your opinion and take it more "lightly" next time.
Didn't you kinda assume I was trying to take this with full on seriousness..? But okay..
I see no reason for you to apologize, its you're opinion.
In all honesty, for you to determine what the mood is does not make you right or wrong. Some people set debates like this, it doesn't mean they are looking for a "funny" debate. And if the long description never clarifies, I can take this as I please.
Thanks for your vote either way.
sigh, you disappoint me. i have made my vote with the walrus.
at least he doesnt assume what i think or feel.
Maybe so..? Though, I get were you're coming from. And maybe you couldn't tell, I added humor of my own.
I'm not much into humor but when needed, i'll add a little something. If you looked into my other debates, you would see the difference. Either way, if you couldn't tell, its possible you just don't quite understand the small bits of my humor.
Basically, I didn't take this as seriously as you thought.
To me funny need not equal stupid. Taking something funny as the right kind of serious, tickles my funny bone.
Black Adder for example, is funny because it’s so witty; not because anyone farts… well, except Hugh Laurie.
im sorry, but its not up to you to designate the seriousness or levity of a debate. the person making the debate sets the tone/mood.
even if he is okay with you being serious, it doesnt negate the prescendent of his debate.
sorry.
what about it? are you implying there is a contridiction?
If you check the comments, I was, per my request to take this debate "seriously".
Description never stated I had to take this as a funny debate, and I really only accepted for his voting.
this is a non sequistur debate, you dont win it by logic or tearing apart arguements.
you win it by being just as silly or by assuming he is right and then trolling/joking back.
Is it possible for you to vote on this? No worries if you can't. I'm trying to continue my win streak or lose it, knowing it was an explained vote.
I mentioned you because of your appearance in this thread and as of right now trust your judgment.
No problem. Thank you.
I would have included you along with Weaver and Aleutian, but you're rarely active so I wasn't sure you would see this.
But to update you, there's currently a Tournament where topics are randomly assigned. Open Voting decreases the chance of voters, but through Judge selection, the selected judges are more likely to vote. Would you be interested in judging on one of these debates?
Sure, I'll do it.
(Weaver) Could be a few weeks to a month from now. Debates take a while to finish.
(AleutianTexan) Since you and Weaver have similar voting styles, I would prefer to pair you up as my default choices for Judge selection if you're willing.
That would be fun, when would I be judging?
Since your voting privileges are back, there is a solid chance I will choose you as a judge in the upcoming rounds of the Tournament. If I am able to, I will negotiate to have you and AleutianTexan as default choices for the Judges.
If you cannot or decide you do not want to, that is perfectly fine.
My voting privileges are back, let's go! Thanks guys!
My argument was on the rough side. Sorry!
Thank you. I'm trying to hurry it up, i'm attending an event in a couple. The argument will be posted in a couple of minutes.
You are almost out of time.
“i dont do jokes or sarcasm. You gotta know who you are talking to before joking.”
“as a human who is a canadian mongoose i support your silliness.”
is there a reason you posted that here? you can ask me on the forum if you want.
otherwise i have no idea why you tagged me.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/8995-i-cannot-vote?page=1&post_number=17
as a human who is a canadian mongoose i support your silliness.
been a while since i saw a non sequitur debate
https://youtu.be/vW6se0AGQf0
It's what I do with my walrus hands tbh, I only care for fish.
Thanks for the $1K!
You’re a real one for that.
Sure
Alright. I'm not really into trolling and only really came for viewing the short description. Is it alright for me to take this "seriously"?
Trolling for arguments so it is at least legit.
My bad, saw your short description.
Are we actually debating or are you just writing a few words to get your voting?