Instigator / Pro
15
1641
rating
63
debates
65.08%
won
Topic
#813

Wrick-It-Ralph Should Bring Back His Elephant Profile Picture

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
9
Better sources
6
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
3
2

After 3 votes and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
20
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

No information

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:

If I was to vote. I would go with RM simply for knowing how the elephant moves, even if it was only to win a debate, lol.

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 very neatly refutes the simplicity argument with Wrick's own analysis of his old prof.
Con also refutes the continuity argument because two changes is by definition is less continuous than one change. Reverting would be more CONSISTENT, but RM is correct about continuity.

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:

Conduct to pro for cons forfeit.

Pro, imo does not provide a framework for a plausible basis for why one should keep a profile picture vs not. Assuming that it was simple with no meaning is a plausible justification, then con pointing out it has a deep meaning fully undermines that position. Pro then does a complete 180 arguing “ahah! The only thing better than simple is complex” - to me this 180 exposes this point as fairly vacuous. If complex and simple are both good, why not keep his simpler example now?

The remaining argument from continuity seems rather arbitrary. Con points out that changing it back now is a greater harm to continuity. While pro points out that the change was made just around the time of the debate, pro needs to sell me a good reason why I should accept continuity as a basis for voting. His justification is that it helps recognize the individual. This strikes me as somewhat poor - the confusion won’t last long and as con points out - he would be recognized by the new profile. The complexity and motivation argument con made seemed a little less intuitive, but it was mostly unchallenged.

As there is no easy way of objectively weighting the criteria, it’s difficult for me to anchor either of the two arguments to any real value. This means that the “should” pro provides me is relatively arbitrary. I am faced with a poor - unchallenged reason not to change, and a slightly better - but challenged example. Given that con successfully turned around the simplicity point, I feel con edges this one - as there’s no clear and objective reason to change back - and cons subjective reason is effectively unchallenged.

Arguments to con.