Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
9
debates
61.11%
won
Topic
#6207
Debate must be voted on basis of arguments ,not on basis of forfeiture.
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 5,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Contender / Con
0
1522
rating
10
debates
60.0%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Welcome, Mr. AdaptableRatman,
This topic is like gold — it’s essential for the betterment of this wonderful platform.
Debates – The Voice of Expression:
Debates are like the divine children of speech — powerful, enlightening, and transformative. They give us a golden opportunity to express our thoughts freely. And DebateArt.com is an excellent platform that makes this possible. Whether you're a school student or a working adult, sitting in India or across the globe, anyone can debate here thanks to the power of the internet. I extend my heartfelt gratitude to the developers of this site for creating such a space.
Voting – A Symbol of Freedom and Responsibility:
Voting on this platform is a powerful responsibility. It’s a symbol of democratic expression — a right given to every user here. But as we all know, with great power comes great responsibility. Unfortunately, some misuse this tool to manipulate outcomes.
The Loophole – A Serious Threat:
Even the world’s strongest constitutions have loopholes, and history shows us how such gaps have led to crimes. If similar loopholes exist on this site, they must be addressed and removed.
Let me explain clearly with an example:
Example:
I, Jonrohith, ask my friend Mr. AdaptableRatman to create a fake account named “X.”
My current win rate is just 33%. I start 10 debates where "X" acts as my opponent (CON side). I instruct “X” to either forfeit some debates or intentionally post weak arguments to ensure I win.
Since most of the debates are forfeited or one-sided, the voters naturally vote in my favor. As a result, my win rate shoots up dramatically — maybe even above 90%!
Even worse, I can keep creating multiple accounts to cover my tracks, making it harder for others to detect the manipulation. Sadly, some users are actually using this trick.
How to Close This Loophole:
The only effective solution is simple:
“Votes must be based on the quality of arguments, not on forfeiture alone.”
This is the only way to ensure genuine, fair competition.
I’ve started this debate because a few users recently accused me of making mistakes while voting. I want to make it clear — my intention is only to protect the fairness of this platform.
Questions for my opponent (CON):
- Do you have any realistic remedy for this loophole?
- Do you believe forfeiting a debate should count as a valid win for opponent?
I will present more detailed arguments and possible solutions in the upcoming rounds. Looking forward to your views, Mr. AdaptableRatman.
Forfeited
Round 2
DEBATE MUST BE VOTED ON BASIS OF ARGUMENTS
the act of forfeiting : the loss of property or money because of a breach of a legal obligation
Of course in context of the debate, the obligation and punishment are neither legal nor monetary respectively.
Pro is asking you to not penalise me for forfeiting, it is appreciated.
Unfortunately, Pro is wrong in this topic.
7-point system makes this a false dichotomy
The 7-point voting system allows 1 point to be deducted for partial forfeiture, this leaves Arguments as a 3-point counterweight that means the forfeiter can still win the debate.
That is the norm on this website, I presume the context of this debate is debates in this website.
Winner Selection and over 50% forfeited debates
If someone forfeits over 50% of a debate, they are making it difficult for the opponent to rebut or defend what they bring later. If they forfeit every Round after the beginning, they surely must lose even if the opponent argued terribly. Yet, when they show up later at the end andnforfeited al Rounds prior and get an uncontested chance to rebuke all the opponent siad with 0 plausible Round to defend against saud rebuttals, that is terrible sportsmanship and voters must clamp down on it
Debating is a sport and artform, not solely a science. Even if it is a science, how can one strategise a 4 Round debate where the opponent hides all arguments until later and spama them Rounds 3 and 4?
Round 3
Con said:
"Pro is asking you to not penalise me for forfeiting, it is appreciated."
But I never said this , I think con is in some confusion, Topic is debate must be voted on basis of arguments not on forfeits.
Why I chosen this topic:
What is forfeiture?, When some persons skips some or all rounds in a debate, then system tells forfeited a round. I strongly argue this is not only a forfeiture. But many rule followers says this is alone forfeiture. There is another indirect forfeiture, that is when person just write single sentence like hi, welcome to debate, etc and publish that single sentence irrelevant of topic then we want to consider this also a forfeiture , but I seen many people not considering this as forfeiture.
I am ready to give titles of those debates you can check it.
- Religion is beneficial-Autism vs greatsungod ( In that debate , on first round autism forfeited , but on second round pro(greatsungod) also indirectly forfeited saying ok, that is (ok) not related to topic. And in 4 votes almost 3 votes are decided on basis of Con(autism) forfeiture, but he gave a detailed explanation of topic in round, but none of 3 voters consider that. That single word by pro (ok) is also a forfeiture ,but no body considered that as forfeiture. So that is a sophisticated win for pro by just saying 4 sentence in round 1 and one word in round two, That debate should be a tie. This is a totally unfair. Debate link : Religion is beneficial .
- Islam is the only true religion- Hana vs greatsungod /// I would vote this debate as funniest, Unfair debate of all time, foat, In this debate pro is Hana, and a con is sun. Pro forfeited all round, But con also forfeited all rounds except a first round , also in that round con not forfeited but left blank space as an argument. According to God of fair that also must be forfeited, so both pro and con forfeited all rounds, so it must be a tie, but some ugliest people voted unfair, on 5 votes , 2 votes said that is a tie, but remaining three voters including moderators [ Barney] voted for con , They are accepting that blank space of con as argument. That is totally unfair .I think that voters have void in their head, brain is missing JK, Debate link: Islam is the only true religion
I request all to check these debates.
Voting on basis of arguments does not affect the punishment of forfeiture:
I firmly say that voting on basis of argument does not affect punishment of forfeiture, For that we want to consider Forfeited argument as zero argument this also include single word like ok, or single sentence or argument that is unrelated to topic that should be considered as zero argument.
Eg:
If I posted argument in a one round debate , but con is forfeited , so con produced zero argument, so directly I want to win, so we can see that punishment of forfeiture is not affected, But I [Pro] produce a argument that should be related to topic.
Answer to con's question:
",how can one strategize a 4 Round debate where the opponent hides all arguments until later and spama them Rounds 3 and 4?"
Answer: If Con forfeited first two rounds but posted his arguments in later rounds, In this time also we want to consider quality of arguments, not on forfeiture, but as per rule skipping 50 % rounds only reduce conduct points,. As con skipped two rounds , we should consider all arguments thoroughly and, vote for pro if pro published his arguments genuinely all rounds , if pro also skipped 2 rounds by saying reasons in single sentence ,unrelated to topic, then we want to consider that debate as 2 rounds if they produced arguments.
Answer: If Con forfeited first two rounds but posted his arguments in later rounds, In this time also we want to consider quality of arguments, not on forfeiture, but as per rule skipping 50 % rounds only reduce conduct points,. As con skipped two rounds , we should consider all arguments thoroughly and, vote for pro if pro published his arguments genuinely all rounds , if pro also skipped 2 rounds by saying reasons in single sentence
Pro concedes the debate.
He agrees with penalising forfeits. What Pro seems to have issue with is not also penalising bad arguments.
If one side makes terrible arguments and the other forfeits, the forfeiter must always lose.
round 2 is not modified by ai
The base essay is written by me and enriched by chatgpt for better understanding of all people.