Total votes: 171
Full forfeit
Con forfeit
Full forfeit
Concession
Concession
Full forfeit
Like it or not, con was the only one to provide an argument, thus he wins by default.
Pro forfeits the first round and only argues in the final round, where the opponent cannot respond. Thus, I award the vote to Pro.
Pretty much a straightforward vote: Pro completely drops all of con's arguments. Con shows that rap battles can be debates can be permitted under the following circumstances:
1. The nature of the debate being a rap battle is agreed in advance
2. The intentions of any rap battle insults are qualified in the first round, and ideally at the beginning of each following round
3. The rap battle is not intended to be a personal attack, rather it is an argument style, and that style is part of the agreement of the parties.
Pro pretty much drops all of this giving con an easy win.
"I cannot prove Pele is the greatest of all time."
This is effectively a concession. Pro has the burden of proof to prove that Pele is the GOAT. Because he conceded that he cannot prove the case, he loses.
Full forfeit
I score these types of debates by scoring each round. Whoever gets the most points wins.
Round 1
Pro forfeited, con wins automatically. Score 0-1
Round 2
A Barf A Minute is cute, but I liked con's MAGA parody better.
Score 0-2. Con wins.
Full forfeit
Full forfeit and a terrible song
Full forfeit and plagiarism
This was a really bad debate from both sides. Although Pro's arguments were weak, they were mostly dropped by con.
CONDUCT
I give conduct to Pro because Con violated the structure of the debate that is set forth in the description. I'm further giving Pro the conduct point because it is obvious that Con was not trying and didn't put in any effort to debate. This is proven by his last round which is literally 'nonsense.'
ARGUMENTS
All of Pro's arguments were dropped. Con dropped Pro's first two contentions and effectively conceded at the end. "Nonsense" is not an argument. Con has to do more than just call an argument nonsense.
Con conceded
Concession
full forfeit
Concession. Fantastic debate!!
Con forfeited more than 1/2 the rounds.
Concession
Concession
Forfeiting is bad conduct.
Forfeiture
Both forfeited, but con was theo only one to present a real argument. Con's main argument is that Ragnar still has the right to vote, which he does. Pro never makes an argument and the only thing he responds with is Charles Dickens, which makes absolutely no senes in this context.
2/4 forfeit. That's bad conduct!
Full forfeit
Forfeiture
Conduct: Forfeit
Arguments: Pro was the only one to really provide arguments for their side. Con's main argument was "Nonsense 1 is greater than anything less than one even by a bit." Pro countered this by using sound mathematical equations that prove that 0.999.... is, in fact, equal to one. Finally, con completely dropped pro's points. Con failed to respond to the mathematical equations provided, thus pro wins.
Full forfeit
Plagiarism and forfeit. Any form of plagiarism is worthy of an automatic loss because they didn't present any original argument and failed to meet their BOP.
This debate was a colossal fail. Pro doesn't seem to understand that they always have the burden of proof. Pro's entire argument boiled down to "there is no way for you to disprove the little green men." However, as con correctly pointed out, that's not his burden to show they didn't. Since Pro dropped every one of con's contentions and failed to provide any solid evidence on his side, the arguments go to con. Conduct to con for the forfeit.
I was really blown away by con's rap "forfeit," but nonetheless Supa wins out based on his round 1
Pro's lie is certainly not surprising since he is known to have lied before in his debate with bsh. That being said, lying to sway voters is absolutely abhorrent and is conduct that I feel is worthy of a 7-point merit loss.
Concession
full forfeit
concession
Con forfeited 1/2 the rounds. That's bad conduct!
Concession
Full forfeit
Counter bomb
full forfeit
What pink said!