Instigator / Pro
15
1596
rating
42
debates
63.1%
won
Topic
#459

Bsh1 is a better overall debater then Rational Madman

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
6
Better sources
6
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
3
3

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

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
5,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
18
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

1: The BoP is shared.
2: I will waive the 1st round and my opponent will waive the last round. They must signify this in the round. Violation is an automatic loss of the conduct point.
3: A forfeit is an automatic loss unless apologized for in the comments.

That’s... not helpful.

Liar

Name who? The styles of debate where this is allowed?

-->
@whiteflame

Name them

-->
@RationalMadman

Just to be clear about this, RM, I actually agree with @Ramshutu on this one. A new point is one that is not directly responsive to an argument given in the previous round. New data, i.e. evidence to support an argument already given, is valid in most forms of debate. You can argue that it's abusive in its own right, and I can understand that view, but there are a lot of people who would take the perspective that it's absolutely fine.

-->
@Ramshutu

It was BRAND NEW data. He only beat me because only one biased voter voted on the debate on the environment, there's much more to this than you think.

-->
@RationalMadman

When your opponent uses quotation marks (“like this”) around stuff you said I the previous round, and then provides a reason to discount that information this is called a “rebuttal”, a new point, is where a new piece of information, unrelated to the “ rebuttal” or other “arguments” is added out of the blue.

At the most charitable, he made one new point, and even that is kinda borderline in the context of everything said and didn’t end up changing any of the weighting decision.

-->
@Ramshutu

There's no point reasoning with you on your votes, I've come to learn that.

-->
@RationalMadman

His “new points” were rebuttals to your points in the previous round.

-->
@Raltar

You're o ly heating me by not voting but do what you want.

-->
@Ramshutu

He brought new points when I couldn't respond.

I mean, hell, they are still at it over two weeks later. It's bad enough when some random user pulls a stunt like that, throwing a massive hissy fit because someone voted against them and refused to play by their obscene list of rules. But when moderators, the people who SUPPOSEDLY enforce the rules, are still crying and whining like two-year-olds even weeks later, there is a serious problem. It isn't even enough for just one moderator to do it either, but he has to call in his buddies to try to back him up.

That kind of piss-poor sportsmanship isn't the sign of a good debater, or an emotionally mature person in general. And just because your sixth-grade debate coach told you something doesn't mean people on the internet have to go along with it.

I may have to abstain from voting on this, because my opinion on this subject is just too strong.

I firmly believe the the moderators on this site are absolutely AWFUL debaters, which further hurts their credibility as moderators of a site like this...

Bsh1 and Virtuoso both have really awesome formatting and present amazing opening arguments... but their obsession with the formalities of "professional" debate are their downfall. After the opening volley, they literally waste the entire rest of the debate trying to weasel their way into an "easy" victory by setting up convoluted arguments about how their opponent violated some obscure rule... Such as bsh1 harassing a particular voter for several days straight about how "dropped points automatically become true!!!11" Notice how they are among the users who tack pointless and unenforceable extra rules onto the debate description, because they can't argue without all that stuff backing them up.

And as for rating... I've been told that DDO had serious issues with biased voting and abuse, so that fails as an argument in my eyes. And this site isn't much better, since troll debates contribute to rating and are easy to abuse.

Bottom line; Trying to bury your opponent in needless verbage and then claim victory on the basis of a technicality doesn't make someone a good debater.

-->
@Ramshutu
@Raltar

doesn't matter, you have provided 0 objective way to measure an overall better debater. I will just let the voters decide, tagged please observe that Alec just countered me with mentioning other stats but offered 0 way to convert that into an actual 'better debater' capacity in any overall, objective sense.

I am aware bsh1 didn't , on that account, win due to the glitch. If you bring his other account that comes into play and you also need to see what i said about the voting moderation during his rise.

Bsh1 is better than RM though. RM basically just debate spams accepting like 6 debates at once having raltar and ramshutu automatically vote in his favor on each one and just other types of unethical shenanigans.

Bsh1 likes to tightly control his debates with unnecessary and lengthy rules. I saw him debate envisage once and because he felt envisage was winning he asked for the debate not to continue. He begged to end the debate because he thought he might lose. He added about 5 new rules to his list after that to make sure he never faces a non canned argument you see basically every other day.

Proof of something

Here is the debate list next to leaderboard:
https://i.imgur.com/7OjWynC.png

I didn't think of it like that. Want more rounds after this if there is not a consensus delivered in 2 rounds?

-->
@Alec

You want a 2 round debate?! LOL OK

I meant "than" if that is the correct spelling. I think the point of Rule 2 is to basically give me the last word. I plan on waving Round 1 per the rules.

-->
@Alec

Also, clarify that you meant 'than' not 'then' in the Resolution. I will agree with the new spelling and move on with the proper debate we are having.

-->
@Alec

In Round 1 Post that Rule 2 was accidentally pasted and I will not troll you by risking posting nothing in Round 3 and saying to give me the conduct point. That's a promise.