"Were this a 4-measures voting count, he probably wouldn't say so. The forseeable reason I can see the construction of this sentence is that taking or leaving a conduct point does not affect CON winning because Pro said basically nothing at all."
My bad, I take things a bit seriously sometimes. I simply was wondering for future reference if my opponent weren't to forfeit. Besides that, thanks for confirming.
--
"Needless to say, that is possibly the best execution I have seen on this topic. Hating all people equally including homosexuals never even crossed my mind, or the mind of several others before who would rather argue this position from a religo-societal standpoint."
At least I know it wasn't the worst idea. I appreciate the comment. My entire idea was thinking outside of common presented points, for the most part, as of which is why I accepted this debate for the opinions of another. However I can't say there weren't flaws with posting that part of the argument. I just not really, but did know it couldn't be countered based on how I felt my opponent wrote their resolution.
Yeah, i'm not much into heavy amounts of joking around in my debates.
That said, are you serious about losing a conduct point? I'm not sure if you're serious or not. If so, where does the CoC state that? Unless I forgot it while skimming the CoC.
"You are a coward and would refuse ANY debate I started challenging you on."
I'm a coward? You're sitting here insulting me like I care on the internet.
First off, I already expressed I wouldn't debate you because you clearly lack capability to even have a discussion without defaming. I have no interest. You haven't even proved for me to have the slightest possible interest in debating you.
I don't debate (mostly) for ELO, I debate for my opinion. Though i'm not interested in something that my opinion is being only insulted on.
Blah, blah, blah. All you do is sit there, type and insult someone. Got anything better to do? I haven't debated you before and at this point, I don't wish to begin in one with you. You obviously lack taking anything without throwing a slander towards someone. I could careless if you think I suck at debating, you're one to talk. Even others can take criticism or opinions but obviously if you can't you're the only one who can call themselves a moron.
This entire thing is just proving my point. You want to use 'fancy' words but in reality its nothing but making you a fool.
PS. You stated intellectual coward twice now in a few minutes. I think this is what we call a "banal response".
If anything, your response is banal. You've said this same thing, just with a couple different words multiple times, responding to other users.
Hypocrite!
I'm sorry you can't take my laughter over this stupidity. Anytime someone disapproves of your opinion you act all childish and upset over a few words. Chill.
Note: My numbers seem to be messed up. I actually only have nine sources references. I was planning on having another contention but due to the lack of characters I had to get rid of it. Why did I forget to change the number order? I procrastinated and waited until thirty minutes before my argument was due. I didn't get to double check any of my work, my bad, voters.
Scarface wouldn't even try to diss K-Rino. I'm surprised you made a matchup that would never happen.
Even if it did, K-Rino would destroy. Its been a little while since i've actually listened to them but I think this one is obvious.
--
RationalMadMan,
Yeah, sure. Even with my opinion, i'll vote for whomever did the best. That said, it will take me a little bit to get to this. I unfortunately don't have time to vote on this until I vote on my other debates like your other rap with Sir.Lancelot.
My bad for the long wait. I procrastinated until the last moment; a few hours left. I'll try to have a better argument next time and please excuse any errors I didn't get time to correct.
As of right now, you only detected the conclusion as Chat-GPT written. However, I checked one of his contentions, State Actions and its 95.3% AI GPT by ZeroGPT. What does one do after this? I checked the rest of the argument without references and its 90.66% AI GPT by ZeroGPT. Along with 89.38% AI GPT with references involved. Since it's not a total of 99% or above I would recommend checking out the argument in divided sections with the same or different detectors. Though I assume you have already done so.
--
So, yes. It doesn't matter how much someone writes that is plagiarised, it was plagiarism. Of course to an extent. This was the entire contention. So once again, yes. Even based on this current evidence from both you and Sir.Lancelot is enough for me to place my vote, all points, in your direction. Usually I only vote for the person with the best argument but in this case I think I would be voting for you. That said even though they have ruined the spirit of the debate, I still believe you should continue this debate with effort. If the debate hadn't turned out to find some plagiarism, you would've tried as intended. Upon accepting this debate, you wanted to debate this topic. Of course the decision is up to you.
--
Its a bit odd. If you view his other debates, his formats are different from his current debates and he is currently engaging in a rape battle with Sir.Lancelot. But then again the rates for this debate "The god of the Bible is morally evil" is all detected as AI GPT except for the references and the bible verses.
RationalMadMan & Sir.Lancelot,
Alright, cool. I finished reading this rap battle, or diss. I have my ideas. I think i'll be voting. I practically have my vote made in my head, it just needs to be typed and formatted correctly.
My vote should be published at least by the end of the week.
How did you choose the points for legibility? It was never explained and i'm curious or would this be counted with the flow?
If I vote, my vote would include many different factors but I am asking in curiosity which may or may not affect my vote. It most likely won't due to my opinion being quite different from others.
Pro, you really put yourself out there. As it states, for any and all cases of crime.
Though I am glad we are doing this debate, it gives me a topic to discuss that I haven't explored.
As per description:
Con = The prison system sometimes has to use means of punishment.
(Key word: sometimes). I simply had to show that sometimes punishment is in order, now there are many examples out there that I will use. Even if it weren't to be sometimes, I think I can pull something together.
Alrighty, i'll see what I can do. I have another debate to vote on with the_viper and Sir.Lancelot but i'll get to it when I can.
Sir.Lancelot,
Your good. It was a bad interpretation on my side. I can see your reason for specifically liking someones voting style, almost everyone does.
When this debate is done, would you debate me on the same topic? Same parameters if wanted.
- Once you publish an argument i'll have an idea on your view since its not explained anywhere
I think this would be wrong. He is not morally evil however anyone who opposes him will be punished.
Its more of he doesn't do good or evil. It depends on the person you ask.
I would accept but the time per round is not to my liking.
"Were this a 4-measures voting count, he probably wouldn't say so. The forseeable reason I can see the construction of this sentence is that taking or leaving a conduct point does not affect CON winning because Pro said basically nothing at all."
My bad, I take things a bit seriously sometimes. I simply was wondering for future reference if my opponent weren't to forfeit. Besides that, thanks for confirming.
--
"Needless to say, that is possibly the best execution I have seen on this topic. Hating all people equally including homosexuals never even crossed my mind, or the mind of several others before who would rather argue this position from a religo-societal standpoint."
At least I know it wasn't the worst idea. I appreciate the comment. My entire idea was thinking outside of common presented points, for the most part, as of which is why I accepted this debate for the opinions of another. However I can't say there weren't flaws with posting that part of the argument. I just not really, but did know it couldn't be countered based on how I felt my opponent wrote their resolution.
Can you elaborate? I'm not exactly sure what is being argued.
Pro could win this blindfolded, with the right mindset of course.
Yeah, i'm not much into heavy amounts of joking around in my debates.
That said, are you serious about losing a conduct point? I'm not sure if you're serious or not. If so, where does the CoC state that? Unless I forgot it while skimming the CoC.
No longer allowed to play devils advocate guys! Funny. Guess I just won't say anything next time.
"Thanks for proving you are a narcissist loser."
Woah! I don't have a disorder.. But even if I did, you have got to have at least three.
"You are a coward and would refuse ANY debate I started challenging you on."
I'm a coward? You're sitting here insulting me like I care on the internet.
First off, I already expressed I wouldn't debate you because you clearly lack capability to even have a discussion without defaming. I have no interest. You haven't even proved for me to have the slightest possible interest in debating you.
I don't debate (mostly) for ELO, I debate for my opinion. Though i'm not interested in something that my opinion is being only insulted on.
I started by sharing my opinion, not trying to insult you. I laced it with sarcasm to prove my point.
"FUCKING HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Oh no, someones upset!
Blah, blah, blah. All you do is sit there, type and insult someone. Got anything better to do? I haven't debated you before and at this point, I don't wish to begin in one with you. You obviously lack taking anything without throwing a slander towards someone. I could careless if you think I suck at debating, you're one to talk. Even others can take criticism or opinions but obviously if you can't you're the only one who can call themselves a moron.
This entire thing is just proving my point. You want to use 'fancy' words but in reality its nothing but making you a fool.
PS. You stated intellectual coward twice now in a few minutes. I think this is what we call a "banal response".
If anything, your response is banal. You've said this same thing, just with a couple different words multiple times, responding to other users.
Hypocrite!
I'm sorry you can't take my laughter over this stupidity. Anytime someone disapproves of your opinion you act all childish and upset over a few words. Chill.
No, actually, are you serious? I can't actually talk to you without laughing right now.
"Screams “I HAVE NO ARGUMENT” so I will submit an ad hominem/appeal to mockery"
What? Whatever you want to moan and whine about.
Then again, theres 'NO' reason for it either. Just a waste of energy, time, resources, etc.
"Lastly, when each student walks into school they are all treated equally"
Funny! That's a great one.
Define "agree" and I might accept.
And by agree you mean agree to just go to that location?
Elaborate?
Are you saying there should be a right to duel?
Sources:
1. https://arhsharbinger.com/24840/opinion/standardized-tests-do-not-capture-students-skills-should-be-eliminated/
2. https://proctoredu.com/blog/tpost/5dk67zrns1-academic-dishonesty-statistics#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20most%20thorough,having%20cheated%20in%20some%20form
3. https://www.cmu.edu/teaching/solveproblem/strat-cheating/index.html
4. https://www.ascd.org/blogs/15-reasons-why-standardized-tests-are-problematic
5. https://sp2.upenn.edu/press/rich-students-get-better-sat-scores-heres why/#:~:text=Mcardle%20from%20the%20University%20of,students%20compared%20to%20white%20students.
6. https://www.ascd.org/blogs/15-reasons-why-standardized-tests-are-problematic
7. https://www.dailynebraskan.com/opinion/opinion-colleges-should-abolish-all-standardized-testing/article_e4d625a2-321f-11ed-bebc-03214793b33c.html
8. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/why-standardized-tests-dont-measure-educational-quality
9. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/why-standardized-tests-dont-measure-educational-quality
Note: My numbers seem to be messed up. I actually only have nine sources references. I was planning on having another contention but due to the lack of characters I had to get rid of it. Why did I forget to change the number order? I procrastinated and waited until thirty minutes before my argument was due. I didn't get to double check any of my work, my bad, voters.
The number of people that just log off and never come back is disappointing.
Scarface wouldn't even try to diss K-Rino. I'm surprised you made a matchup that would never happen.
Even if it did, K-Rino would destroy. Its been a little while since i've actually listened to them but I think this one is obvious.
--
RationalMadMan,
Yeah, sure. Even with my opinion, i'll vote for whomever did the best. That said, it will take me a little bit to get to this. I unfortunately don't have time to vote on this until I vote on my other debates like your other rap with Sir.Lancelot.
My bad for the long wait. I procrastinated until the last moment; a few hours left. I'll try to have a better argument next time and please excuse any errors I didn't get time to correct.
Alright, cool. Guess i'll try debating you for once.
One week, maybe?
And am I allowed to copy almost everything I have previously stated in a debate?
Honestly, I have to many words and opinions about him (and Tate) that just can't be expressed in these comments.
Maybe one of these days I need to have post a thread.
Depends. I can refer to "I" as me.
Yes, the short description does target the opposite side however the set in stone position for them is con.
You know what.. i'll just accept this and see how this goes.
The definition of "bad".
I will accept if you list the definitions.
You're on the wrong side.
"I'm about to go on a walk"
"Oh no, you can't."
"Why?"
"It's not glorifying the lord."
There's so many ways to counter some of your arguments i'm surprised holes weren't put through your argument.
As of right now, you only detected the conclusion as Chat-GPT written. However, I checked one of his contentions, State Actions and its 95.3% AI GPT by ZeroGPT. What does one do after this? I checked the rest of the argument without references and its 90.66% AI GPT by ZeroGPT. Along with 89.38% AI GPT with references involved. Since it's not a total of 99% or above I would recommend checking out the argument in divided sections with the same or different detectors. Though I assume you have already done so.
--
So, yes. It doesn't matter how much someone writes that is plagiarised, it was plagiarism. Of course to an extent. This was the entire contention. So once again, yes. Even based on this current evidence from both you and Sir.Lancelot is enough for me to place my vote, all points, in your direction. Usually I only vote for the person with the best argument but in this case I think I would be voting for you. That said even though they have ruined the spirit of the debate, I still believe you should continue this debate with effort. If the debate hadn't turned out to find some plagiarism, you would've tried as intended. Upon accepting this debate, you wanted to debate this topic. Of course the decision is up to you.
--
Its a bit odd. If you view his other debates, his formats are different from his current debates and he is currently engaging in a rape battle with Sir.Lancelot. But then again the rates for this debate "The god of the Bible is morally evil" is all detected as AI GPT except for the references and the bible verses.
I'll be bring up more than just murder and rape.
RationalMadMan & Sir.Lancelot,
Alright, cool. I finished reading this rap battle, or diss. I have my ideas. I think i'll be voting. I practically have my vote made in my head, it just needs to be typed and formatted correctly.
My vote should be published at least by the end of the week.
DavidAZ,
I see.. thanks.
How did you choose the points for legibility? It was never explained and i'm curious or would this be counted with the flow?
If I vote, my vote would include many different factors but I am asking in curiosity which may or may not affect my vote. It most likely won't due to my opinion being quite different from others.
Pro, you really put yourself out there. As it states, for any and all cases of crime.
Though I am glad we are doing this debate, it gives me a topic to discuss that I haven't explored.
As per description:
Con = The prison system sometimes has to use means of punishment.
(Key word: sometimes). I simply had to show that sometimes punishment is in order, now there are many examples out there that I will use. Even if it weren't to be sometimes, I think I can pull something together.
I look forward to your argument.
Guess its up to you whether or not you call it out.
I'm not surprised, I had that idea...
Your entire thing seems like copied and pasted material.
That's a lot of sources..
If you were ever to come online, I would challenge you to this exact debate.
I plan on it.
RationalMadMan,
You do have a point.
Alrighty, i'll see what I can do. I have another debate to vote on with the_viper and Sir.Lancelot but i'll get to it when I can.
Sir.Lancelot,
Your good. It was a bad interpretation on my side. I can see your reason for specifically liking someones voting style, almost everyone does.
I wasn't sure if I was gonna vote either way. However, would you like me to not vote? I can do that if wanted.
Your vote tempts me to vote..
You got it.
My vote is around half way done. It's a bit of a tough decision..
When this debate is done, would you debate me on the same topic? Same parameters if wanted.
- Once you publish an argument i'll have an idea on your view since its not explained anywhere
What am I even supposed to respond with? Whats the debate?
This shouldn't even need to be an argument, it should be common sense..
Yep, thanks. This is my total focus tonight, I have it about half way done.
I got a bit busy.
I think this would be wrong. He is not morally evil however anyone who opposes him will be punished.
Its more of he doesn't do good or evil. It depends on the person you ask.
I would accept but the time per round is not to my liking.
Cool, thanks.
I'll have your debate voted on with Mall most likely in around two or three days.
Bump, I guess? Don't think anyone will see it on the 3rd page.
You got it.
I'll list my sources in the morning.