Instigator / Pro
13
1495
rating
6
debates
33.33%
won
Topic
#964

Islam does not protect free speech and expression

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
18
Better sources
6
12
Better legibility
3
6
Better conduct
1
6

After 6 votes and with 29 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
42
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Description

No information

Oh, and plagarism

-->
@oromagi

That comes from dspjk5-https://www.debate.org/dsjpk5/debates/votes/

-->
@Barney
@Pinkfreud08

I’m living these days for one of pinkfreud08’s “that’s poor conduct!”s

Thanks 4 votes, folks

-->
@DarthVader1

1. Maybe you made a mistake
2. Oh yeah, then WHY DID YOU FORFEIT
3. If someone was to accept the debate, they wouldn't expect something COMPLETELY PLAGIARISED.
4. Just because you found it on some other site, doesn't mean you can pass it off as your own, it's your own fault, and almost all your debates have plagiarized material inside of it.
5. When you post something inside of this site, it's automatically recognized as your own work, therefore you are trying to claim someone else's work as your own.

-->
@oromagi

1. Why did I not remove the chapter's title too? If I was trying to hide it,I would have done the job properly.
2. This debate is of 5 rounds. My own arguments were about to come in the later rounds.
3. I don't care what you believe. The site itself states that its users have received permission from the concerned authorities to post it on the Internet where everyone could use it. If you accepted the debate,what else did you expect? If you can't stand the heat,then get out of the kitchen.
4. The site's users have already written that they have obtained the necessary permission to post it on the Internet. So,there is certainly no theft. The only problem you seem to have is that it was too much for you.

I have no intention to concede anything. If you want,then I'll ask everybody to ignore R1 and award the conduct point to you. But,if you want to discontinue this debate in the later rounds too,it's you who'll be conceding this debate,not me.

-->
@DarthVader1

1) You printed the entirety of chapter 17 except for editing out "Chapter 17," which would have given it away.
2) You did not write a thesis or define terms. You did not author a single word. That's not a support to an argument, that is misrepresentation as argument.
3) You did not use quotes or highlights or italics or bold to suggest special text.
4)Essentially, you handed me the job of refuting in R1 an entire chapter of a professionally researched best-selling book without even the benefit of knowing that so that I could investigate Spencer's sources and critics. If you had truly planned to reveal in some later round that every word you wrote was stolen, you would have obviously been subject to the same criticism. So no, I don't believe you intended to credit Spencer in later rounds.
5) cut & pasting some other guy's whole chapter is not a "whoops, I didn't know that wasn't allowed" kind of mistake. If you attended primary school, you learned that this behavior falls somewhere between lying & theft.

You should concede this debate and apologize for shit conduct.

-->
@oromagi

https://epdf.pub/politically-incorrect-guide-to-islam-by-robert-spencer.html

This is it.

It also said,""This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book". Keeping that in mind,I posted these passages. To avoid trouble,I had thought to declare it as Richard Spencer's work in the later rounds.

-->
@oromagi

I request you to go to the website I posted downwards. You'll see it is a very rough-cut version with lots of spelling mistakes. Even you said that I edited it some. That's because I did so. I cleared the spelling mistakes and formatted it.

-->
@oromagi

https://epdf.pub/politically-incorrect-guide-to-islam-by-robert-spencer.html

This is the website from which I used passages for my argument. It also says that,"This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book". Keeping that in mind,I posted these passages. To avoid trouble,I had thought to declare it as Richard Spencer's work in the later rounds. I had decided to write my own arguments later since I would have 4 more rounds to do so.

-->
@oromagi

I also never claimed this writing to be my own. I had full intent to announce this as Richard Spencer's work in later rounds. To assume that I deliberately stole this and had no future intention to announce its sources is unfair,to say the least.

-->
@oromagi

Wait a second,I was going to quote in my later rounds that this was the work of Richard Spencer. Since this was a 5 round debate,I opted to first quote some work from others before writing my own arguments. I did not do it with the intent of maligning somebody or stealing someone's work. I had full intent of writing in the later rounds that this work was of Richard Spencer's. The point is since this was a 5 round debate,I figured I would have further opportunities to write my own arguments. I was not aware of the fact that I had to write all my arguments without any references from others.

Actually surprised you did not get a No True Scotsman opponent.

I guess no one can argue to the contrary.