More characters and more rounds. Round 1 should have been arguments. It’s impossible to make a strong opening case and rebut your points in R2 with less than 1k characters.
Though ultimately I have a stronger BOP than you do
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Juubi_Wolf// Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded:7 points to con
>Reason for Decision: 1=1.000000000
1 does not equal .9999999
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter does not explain any of the points that we awarded. .
************************************************************************
==================================================================
>Reported vote: drafterman // Moderator action: NOT Removed<
3 points to Pro (arguments). RFD in comments.
Reason for not removal: drafterman’a RFD thoroughly analyzes sourcss and more than sufficiently meeets the votin standard.
==================================================================
Thanks for your feedback! I understand your conduct point to pro and that you feel I was intentionally lazy. Unfortunately real life shit just got in the way. I definitely feel like I should have done much better this debate
"Unless the ban on shirtless models is lifted, has the company lost its touch, its glamour, and its identity completely and is it time for them to regret that draconian mistake, YES or NO?"
In all honesty, this is a question that YOU must answer and connect your answer to the resolution. The debate is about the ethics/morality of their choice. Losing touch, glamor, and identity doesn't have much to do with the resolution IMO.
I agree, but I kinda felt that his argument didn't even hold water as it was irrelevant to the debate itself so I was focusing more on other things in the RFD. Great job.
Ok cool. Thanks for the vote
Ok cool. I didn’t know people could delete their own votes. I appreciate the thorough review
«sylweb» has published a new vote for the debate «Minimum wage»
Please re vote if you can. For some reason it’s not showing up
I’m sad this was a tie
Thanks. I enjoy short debates like this sometimes
Would like some votes on this please. Short debate and shoudl be an easy vote
More characters and more rounds. Round 1 should have been arguments. It’s impossible to make a strong opening case and rebut your points in R2 with less than 1k characters.
Though ultimately I have a stronger BOP than you do
If you want we can make this a 3 round debate and just waive the fourth round
My grandfather passed away this evening. I will try to get my arguments in on time.
Fair enough. Yeah all cops are basically pigs. I don't trust the police and serious reform is needed
Fair enough. I ff’d two rounds and would hate for my opponent to have this debate a tie. Would still like argument feedback though
The debate info and stuff can be entered separately so the first round can be used for arguments instead of acceptance only
Would love some solid votes on this debate
Truth be told I don’t really believe the position I argued for. I wanted to try a devil’s advocate/foreign policy debate.
What did you think of my arguments
It’s alright. I hope we can debate again sometime
All reports are completely anonymous. We don’t even know who’s reporting it, which imo is a good thing.
please wait till sunday to post response if you can
please vote
Fair enough. I like depth.
Mind waiting till Sunday to post arguments?
Lol. I think you're a fairly solid debater. Though to be fair the majority of your debates were with Type1. Anyone who loses to them should feel bad
Thanks so much for accepting! I've been really wanting to debate you on a topic
Debate over. Would love your vote
Honor and trump should never be used in the same sentence
I respect that. It can be difficult playing devil’s advocate especially when you’re passionate about the topic
Thank you!!
Will post after work. Thanks
Hey I'm really sorry for forfeiting. I had a lot going on. Thanks for the debate. Would love to revisit this topic
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Juubi_Wolf// Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded:7 points to con
>Reason for Decision: 1=1.000000000
1 does not equal .9999999
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter does not explain any of the points that we awarded. .
************************************************************************
You waive the last round not the first round
I know. Growing up I heard this argument millions of times.
Correct.
Remind me when this is over to vote on this
==================================================================
>Reported vote: drafterman // Moderator action: NOT Removed<
3 points to Pro (arguments). RFD in comments.
Reason for not removal: drafterman’a RFD thoroughly analyzes sourcss and more than sufficiently meeets the votin standard.
==================================================================
Following!
No it hasn’t. I can leave your vote up because I forfeited and you voted against me. No reason to remove it.
If you want a proper debate on free will I’ll gladly send you a challenge
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: the_bat_man// Mod action: Removed<
2 points awarded. Reasons for voting decision: I object. If Earth wanted judges he/she should have set up the debate as a judge panel process.
[*Reason for removal*] Vote fails to properly explain his vote.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: JCEuroVision96 // Mod action: Removed<
3 points awarded. Reasons for voting decision: Pro made very clear views on the existence of God, while Con dodges his attack.
[*Reason for removal*] JCEuroVision96 voted for the forfeiting side.
************************************************************************
Thanks for your feedback! I understand your conduct point to pro and that you feel I was intentionally lazy. Unfortunately real life shit just got in the way. I definitely feel like I should have done much better this debate
True.
I’ll vote on this later tonight or tomorrow
I was just thinking the way you had it worded it looked like you were arguing against international law
Yeah it’ll be interesting to follow.
Just a thought - it may be better for you to frame this in he positive and have you take the pro position.
Posted round 2!
JC - you have the full BOP in this debate.
"Unless the ban on shirtless models is lifted, has the company lost its touch, its glamour, and its identity completely and is it time for them to regret that draconian mistake, YES or NO?"
In all honesty, this is a question that YOU must answer and connect your answer to the resolution. The debate is about the ethics/morality of their choice. Losing touch, glamor, and identity doesn't have much to do with the resolution IMO.
Unfortunately I can't judge a debate by only one question. "He will in if and only if he answers my question..." is not a valid way to judge a debate.
I agree, but I kinda felt that his argument didn't even hold water as it was irrelevant to the debate itself so I was focusing more on other things in the RFD. Great job.