*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: [Wylted] // Mod action: [Not Removed]
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was borderline. By default, borderline votes are ruled to be sufficient.
************************************************************************
Yeah I wish I could have given you a better challenge, but school and work got in my way. One of the folks in my department left so I had to fill in for them plus work overtime in other departments
European countries are very diverse. In some countries it is easier, while some countries (Ireland) it is much harder. Ireland completely outlawed abortion until recently.
Argumentum ad populum is "The fallacy of attempting to induce acceptance of an unexamined or unproved conclusion by arousing the feelings, prejudices, or interests of a political party, mob, or any large group of people."
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon
It's like saying "Europe has free health care, why shouldn't we?" It's a fallacious argument.
**************************
Mod note: Conceded debates are not moderated. Votes on conceded debates are only removed if the majority of the point goes to the forfeiting side.
**************************
Pretty much exactly what Ramshutu said. Just to add to it, it also makes it easier for people to find mod posts. By having the asterics, it makes it easier for the readers to find our decisions.
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: RationalMadman/Imabench // Mod action: [Not Removed]
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Pinkfreud08 // Mod action: Not Removed
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Dr.Franklin // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 3 points to con for arguments
>Reason for Decision: See below
>Reason for Mod Action: To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main arguments and counterarguments in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
************************************************************************
A=Argument
The BOP was on Pro so I have grouped his arguments
1.Leviticus Quote
2.History
3.Homosexuality is sin
Con arguments
1. Matthew Quote
A1-Pro said-"Yes we should avoid it, but it doesn't mean that we should be a homophile."Conceding the Point
A2-This argument is irrelevent. The Debate resolution is that Does the Bible Tell Christians to be Homophobic? This talked about history.
A3-Again,irrelevent. Doesnt fit thesis or topic.
A1-Both agrees
Arguments-Con
Sources-Tied>No one used any sources outside of Bible
S&P-Ties>No problem with this
Conduct-Tied>Both sides had Great conduct!Great job
Good debate
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 4 points to pro for arguments and conduct
>Reason for Decision: BrotherDThomas please stop using the word of God in this way. You are making the rest of us Christians look bad, not all science is fake and and “satanic”. The verse you used to “prove” the earth is flat can easily be debunked with a proper looking into the word CONTEXT MATTERS. You only gave an argument from authority when it was clearly stated in the debate rules that that was not allowed. Don’t accuse people of satanism and condemn people to hell that is not how the Bible commands us to act. Please work on you conduct and only use arguments like that in purely theological debates.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally
(1) To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main arguments and counterarguments in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
(2) To award conduct points, the voter must (1) identify specific instances of misconduct, (2) explain how this misconduct was excessive, unfair, or in breach of the debate's rules, and (3) compare each debater's conduct.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 1 point to con
>Reason for Decision: Pro presented a much stronger argument and gave more logical points, also Con forfeited which is poor conduct.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally, "To cast a sufficient vote in the choose winner system, a voter must explicitly, and in the text of their RFD, perform the following tasks: (a) survey the main arguments and counterarguments presented in the debate, (b) weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself), and (c) explain how, through the process of weighing, they arrived at their voting decision with regard to assigning argument points. Weighing entails analyzing how the relative strength of one argument or set of arguments outweighed (that is, out-impacted) and/or precluded another argument or set of arguments. Weighing requires analyzing and situating arguments and counterarguments within the context of the debate as a whole.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 1 point to con
>Reason for Decision: Pro did not make a convincing argument and all the "facts" he stated he did not back up with references. He made accusations about biblical truths such as Cain marrying a dinosaur obviously without looking into the bible. Pro then forfeited his last round securing victory for Con. Con was collected and professional and nicely laid out his arguments. He clearly deserves the victory.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally, "To cast a sufficient vote in the choose winner system, a voter must explicitly, and in the text of their RFD, perform the following tasks: (a) survey the main arguments and counterarguments presented in the debate, (b) weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself), and (c) explain how, through the process of weighing, they arrived at their voting decision with regard to assigning argument points. Weighing entails analyzing how the relative strength of one argument or set of arguments outweighed (that is, out-impacted) and/or precluded another argument or set of arguments. Weighing requires analyzing and situating arguments and counterarguments within the context of the debate as a whole.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed
>Reason for Mod Action: Troll debates are not moderated, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: Conceded debates are not moderated unless the voter voted for the conceding side, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless the voter voted for the forfeiting side, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Speedrace // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: semperfortis // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 3 points to pro for arguments
RFD: The resolution is "Is daylight saving time still relevant?"
Con concedes that DST is still used, which is therefore a concession, as it is clearly still relevant by definition.
Pro's argument was a kritik of the resolution which is a perfectly valid argument. Kritiks are valid arguments and are therefore not trolling.
I will happily defend this reason if it is contested.
Reason for mod action: This account is not eligible to vote. Although the RFD meets the standards, he has not yet read the COC.
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************
Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side. In this case, bsh and I determined that it was not a FF and that the vote should be allowed to stand.
*******************************************************************
A full-forfeit debate is defined as a debate that has no argument presented by one side following the opening round, resulting in all subsequent rounds being forfeited. When this is the case, these debates are considered full-forfeit debates and are not moderated unless a voter votes for the forfeiting side. Similarly, a conceded debate is any debate in which on side clearly concedes the debate to their opponent. These debates are considered conceded debates and are not moderated unless a voter votes for the side that concedes.
*******************************************************************
Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side. In this case, both sides FF and thus you cannot vote for either participantl.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 7 to con
RFD: The Pro’s arguments boiled down to: “You are Satanic, my answers are godly.”
Reason for mod action: In order to be eligible to vote, Accounts must have read the site's COC AND completed at least 2 non-troll debates without any forfeits OR posted 100 forum posts
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
**********************
MOD NOTE: Conceded debates are NOT moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side.
**********************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: [Wylted] // Mod action: [Not Removed]
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was borderline. By default, borderline votes are ruled to be sufficient.
************************************************************************
Yeah I wish I could have given you a better challenge, but school and work got in my way. One of the folks in my department left so I had to fill in for them plus work overtime in other departments
Sorry I completely lost track of time .
Then that's their problem, not mine.
To post what we would expect of the other player.
European countries are very diverse. In some countries it is easier, while some countries (Ireland) it is much harder. Ireland completely outlawed abortion until recently.
Argumentum ad populum is "The fallacy of attempting to induce acceptance of an unexamined or unproved conclusion by arousing the feelings, prejudices, or interests of a political party, mob, or any large group of people."
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon
It's like saying "Europe has free health care, why shouldn't we?" It's a fallacious argument.
Argumentum ad populum
****************
Mod note: Full forfeited debates are not moderated. No action is necessary.
****************
*******************
Mod note: Troll debates are not moderated thus no action is taken on the reported votes.
*******************
**************************
Mod note: Conceded debates are not moderated. Votes on conceded debates are only removed if the majority of the point goes to the forfeiting side.
**************************
Let’s waive
I’ll have my arguments posted later tonight
The BOP is on Pro; Con's BOP lies in proving Pro wrong. Con may make original arguments if he wants to.
Yeah I basically have full burden, and no I don't have an issue with that.
Pretty much exactly what Ramshutu said. Just to add to it, it also makes it easier for people to find mod posts. By having the asterics, it makes it easier for the readers to find our decisions.
Speed race isn’t a YEC afaik
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: RationalMadman/Imabench // Mod action: [Not Removed]
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards
************************************************************************
Perm. Alt of Type1
I really need to do a better job at editing once I copy and paste from my word doc. Ugh.
Thanks.
I am removing these votes. Please check your DMs.
Bobson's RFD: Con didn't even rhyme the first stanza of the last rap.
Club's RFD: Since r-battles are not moderated, the above is how I split it up.
Sam's RFD: TheAtheist spit fire, Gatorade acted like a flat tire
Please check your DMs
I'd be happy to debate you.
Thank you!
I'm very tempted to accept this debate.
Posted!
Your wish is my command. Done
It’s all good. The debate is unrated so I don’t care all that much. I hope I did a decent job here’s. If it was rated, I’d have gone a lot stronger
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Pinkfreud08 // Mod action: Not Removed
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Dr.Franklin // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 3 points to con for arguments
>Reason for Decision: See below
>Reason for Mod Action: To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main arguments and counterarguments in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
************************************************************************
A=Argument
The BOP was on Pro so I have grouped his arguments
1.Leviticus Quote
2.History
3.Homosexuality is sin
Con arguments
1. Matthew Quote
A1-Pro said-"Yes we should avoid it, but it doesn't mean that we should be a homophile."Conceding the Point
A2-This argument is irrelevent. The Debate resolution is that Does the Bible Tell Christians to be Homophobic? This talked about history.
A3-Again,irrelevent. Doesnt fit thesis or topic.
A1-Both agrees
Arguments-Con
Sources-Tied>No one used any sources outside of Bible
S&P-Ties>No problem with this
Conduct-Tied>Both sides had Great conduct!Great job
Good debate
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 4 points to pro for arguments and conduct
>Reason for Decision: BrotherDThomas please stop using the word of God in this way. You are making the rest of us Christians look bad, not all science is fake and and “satanic”. The verse you used to “prove” the earth is flat can easily be debunked with a proper looking into the word CONTEXT MATTERS. You only gave an argument from authority when it was clearly stated in the debate rules that that was not allowed. Don’t accuse people of satanism and condemn people to hell that is not how the Bible commands us to act. Please work on you conduct and only use arguments like that in purely theological debates.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally
(1) To award argument points, the voter must (1) survey the main arguments and counterarguments in the debate, (2) weigh those arguments and counterarguments against each other, and (3) explain, based on the weighing process, how they reached their decision.
(2) To award conduct points, the voter must (1) identify specific instances of misconduct, (2) explain how this misconduct was excessive, unfair, or in breach of the debate's rules, and (3) compare each debater's conduct.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 1 point to con
>Reason for Decision: Pro presented a much stronger argument and gave more logical points, also Con forfeited which is poor conduct.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally, "To cast a sufficient vote in the choose winner system, a voter must explicitly, and in the text of their RFD, perform the following tasks: (a) survey the main arguments and counterarguments presented in the debate, (b) weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself), and (c) explain how, through the process of weighing, they arrived at their voting decision with regard to assigning argument points. Weighing entails analyzing how the relative strength of one argument or set of arguments outweighed (that is, out-impacted) and/or precluded another argument or set of arguments. Weighing requires analyzing and situating arguments and counterarguments within the context of the debate as a whole.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Caleb // Mod action: [Removed]
>Points Awarded: 1 point to con
>Reason for Decision: Pro did not make a convincing argument and all the "facts" he stated he did not back up with references. He made accusations about biblical truths such as Cain marrying a dinosaur obviously without looking into the bible. Pro then forfeited his last round securing victory for Con. Con was collected and professional and nicely laid out his arguments. He clearly deserves the victory.
>Reason for Mod Action: This vote is not eligible to vote. In order to vote, an account must: (1) Read the site’s COC AND have completed 2 non-troll/non-FF debate OR have 100 forum posts.
Finally, "To cast a sufficient vote in the choose winner system, a voter must explicitly, and in the text of their RFD, perform the following tasks: (a) survey the main arguments and counterarguments presented in the debate, (b) weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself), and (c) explain how, through the process of weighing, they arrived at their voting decision with regard to assigning argument points. Weighing entails analyzing how the relative strength of one argument or set of arguments outweighed (that is, out-impacted) and/or precluded another argument or set of arguments. Weighing requires analyzing and situating arguments and counterarguments within the context of the debate as a whole.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed
>Reason for Mod Action: Troll debates are not moderated, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
************************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: Conceded debates are not moderated unless the voter voted for the conceding side, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless the voter voted for the forfeiting side, per the site voting policy guidelines. No moderation action is appropriate on this vote.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Speedrace // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: semperfortis // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 3 points to pro for arguments
RFD: The resolution is "Is daylight saving time still relevant?"
Con concedes that DST is still used, which is therefore a concession, as it is clearly still relevant by definition.
Pro's argument was a kritik of the resolution which is a perfectly valid argument. Kritiks are valid arguments and are therefore not trolling.
I will happily defend this reason if it is contested.
Reason for mod action: This account is not eligible to vote. Although the RFD meets the standards, he has not yet read the COC.
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************
Posted!
I know. Almost done. Working on my homework essay right now. Will get to it tomorrow afternoon (cross finger)
No you did not
Sure
Making the argument time 1 week and I will accept
Upon review
*******************************************************************
Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side. In this case, bsh and I determined that it was not a FF and that the vote should be allowed to stand.
*******************************************************************
I'll let bsh review, but as of now, the vote is removed.
A full-forfeit debate is defined as a debate that has no argument presented by one side following the opening round, resulting in all subsequent rounds being forfeited. When this is the case, these debates are considered full-forfeit debates and are not moderated unless a voter votes for the forfeiting side. Similarly, a conceded debate is any debate in which on side clearly concedes the debate to their opponent. These debates are considered conceded debates and are not moderated unless a voter votes for the side that concedes.
There were no arguments this debate.
*******************************************************************
Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side. In this case, both sides FF and thus you cannot vote for either participantl.
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: TheAtheist // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 7 to con
RFD: The Pro’s arguments boiled down to: “You are Satanic, my answers are godly.”
Reason for mod action: In order to be eligible to vote, Accounts must have read the site's COC AND completed at least 2 non-troll debates without any forfeits OR posted 100 forum posts
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************