Instigator / Pro
2
1421
rating
18
debates
22.22%
won
Topic
#4487

Prove your opponent needs to touch grass

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Winner
2
4

After 4 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

Bella3sp
Tags
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
1
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
4
1524
rating
51
debates
75.49%
won
Description

This debate is a certified League of Legends moment

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Pro uses Ad hominem, Con uses tu quoque as rebuttal with even more ad hominem. Nothing is achieved. Grass is not defined, what counts as "touching" is not defined, a massive disappointment of a debate. LOL

Seriously, if you are gonna make a troll debate, make the argument resemble the title. This argument seems like something, is something, but is nothing when you think about it.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

What the fuck

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Great iconic roasts from Con!
Discord mod and the furry comment? LOL.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con comes in strong by citing statistics and flipping the profile picture argument. In a one-round argument, I'm hesitant to give much weight to rebuttals, but I think the arguments Con gave were simply higher quality than the ones Pro gave. Quantity helps here. I'm not sure I buy everything Con is saying about not being a weeb, but most of these arguments are essentially troll accusations. Con provides more of them, paints a clearer picture by referencing Discord mods, and cites statistics.