Dogs are better than cats

It was reported.

do you have to do this for every vote? or was my vote actually reported?

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Mieky // Mod action: Not Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded:
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:

The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.

The vote does mention their opinion, but is literally voting against their opinion so that proves a lack of bias. Further, this is effectively a single round debate, which are really hard for the instigator to win given they make no defenses to their points.
**************************************************

The debates a joke debate largely.

I vote to render decision of my observations of debates, but also to help new site members on the underlying debate protocol that will lead to better debating. I'm 75, and have debated since high school, even in a variety of professional functions, so it is a familiar exercise. I make mistakes, too, so please do not take this as assuming I am an expert. I hope I can be a help. Take it in that light. As attributes go, I learned a lot about cats from your argument I did not know before as I have never had one as a pet. I'm allergic to them, as it happens [their dander causes extreme nasal congestion], but not to dogs, of which I've had several.

Then you misunderstand what I meant by "purpose" in defining, by argument, "Better." As I said, "As a pet? As human or property protection? As something to kick around?" "Better" needs to have that explanation, and neither of you satisfied that threshold. I did not mention that the only description is: "Everyone knows it's true," which amounts to a truism. that advantages Pro., and that cannot be by an instigator.
You both argued for attriv Ute's of dogs and cats, and that's fine for a debate that is abut attributes. But attributes is not tree resolution, is it?
Read the debate instructions relative to "truism" and voting on that principle. You know why I did not, but you'll notice I am a frequent voter. In fact, I rank in the topi ten [#7] of all who vote on debates, and in the top 20 [#14] of all debaters who debate [over 1,200 of us].

Both debaters argue for the respective superiority of the animals as pets. There does not seem to be disagreement between the debaters as to purpose.

Both participants forfeited half the scheduled rounds, and made only claims of what amounts to "better," a nebulous term on which to debate any resolution. "Better," for what purpose? As a pet? As human or property protection? As something to kick around? Neither deserve a vote.

Bro quit after seeing the argument

If I could, I would cast an unjust vote now. I am biased for Con.