I feel like, on one hand, it's impressive that 4 votes were able to be cast within what appears to be a very short time span, but that it's sad that the ability to do it at all is not only valid, but will go unpunished...I'm not even mad, I'm impressed.
What I meant by justice is that Virt was going to come in and fix some problems...I was not planning anything, I was referring to moderators bringing forth justice, not me.
Hahaha, I said that if this were IRL, which it is not, and someone refused to leave me alone in my personal space, i would react violently, and I'd assume others would behave that way too.
Seriously, if you made it clear that someone should stay away from you and they didn't IRL, threatening your personal freedom, what would you do?
The person uttering nonsense to you (Ramshutu) is literally the person not allowed to vote on or participate in this debate, and now is threatening some member's credibility by saying they're suspicious or whatever.
I find it suspicious that members who were told to refrain from this debate have not been moderated yet and even continue to post on here... I mean how many Restraining Orders does one need to get moderated around here?
That's the real suspicion.
RM, I have no idea what you're talking about.
I wrote 3 rules that disallowed people who were on restraining orders from me because they cannot leave me alone or are incessant harassers of me.
Your debate I voted on did not request that none of those individuals vote or participate, but in this case, THE EXACT people told not to engage with me did so any way.
I want you to think of a time IRL where someone asked you to leave them alone...what would happen if you persisted after they CLEARLY requested you to leave them alone?
Let me see that RM passion and answer honestly.
That a debater requests that rules be followed isn't enough to stop people from voting on debates or participating in them.
You guys are fucking assholes Ramshutu and Death23.
Show some fucking respect for people who wish not to engage with either of you.
Really, both of you need to leave me the fuck alone.
Yeah, but he overtly accepted my sources that supported the definition that explicitly allowed for the definitions I was using.
It's silly that I even have to point that out.
I use a definition from a source Con accepted as credible, it supported EXACTLY my case for organisms being GMOs, and it negated how "fringe" it was supposed to be because Con's overt acceptance of the source.
I'm sorry you can't look at this in an unbiased way, really.
Also, it's rather odd that you wait such a long time to be on this site, just to pop in and vote up death23, which makes me think this talk to you is pointless, and you're death23.
Hey Death23, nice vote.
Also, thanks for ignoring rule 1 and 3.
Also your vote admitted that the resolution was true, though broad, so noodle that for a while.
Great idea, but whiteflame is the one who told me to ban you from my debates, so I don't have to whine to him; reasonable people already agree with me here.
You see, the difference is, even if I were to give up my anonymity right now and dox myself right here, given my standing in my community as an educator and coach and the perception of who I am to my children and family at large, I would still say the things I'm saying to you because of your incessant, unregulated harassment of me warrants the aggressive tone and violent words I'm throwing back at you to battle off a persistent harasser who has no regard for my consent.
I would do this in real life every time.
You though...cowards like you on the other hand are using the anonymity of the internet to harass someone who IRL you would never, and I mean NEVER, attempt to fuck with, at all, and you would have left me alone after I asked you to do so on this site over and over again.
IRL, you would not be trying the shit you're trying with me, because you're a coward who uses internet veil to fuck with better, superior, more formidable men who would certainly have no problem eliminating you as the threat that refuses to leave.
Baseball bat choke.
Done.
I expect you to hide behind the internet some more, I'm sure you'll not disappoint; pussies never do.
Ok, I might put up the debate on the open debates and you can accept it if you like my definitions, so I don't flood these guys' debate comments section.
Oh so you knew I was going to point to the source i cited proving I was right, because you read my whole source's DEFINITION section right?
"What constitutes a genetically modified organism (GMO) is not always clear and can vary widely. At its broadest it can include anything that has had its genes altered, including by nature."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism#Definition
I didn't put it in my 5 to be alive, but it is in the definition of life, because life is actually just a property of organic compounds when they are no longer passive and are actively recruited to fight for the system's survival. Living is an active battling of the environment and the characteristics necessary to have that battle are what define life.
Not having this autonomous characteristic makes it like a passive organic compound whose activity is at the direction of something autonomously living.
I didn't know about parasites for viruses, that's fucking cool, and it does speak to viruses' ability to behave like life.
So this topic was actually the essay topic for our district's benchmark assessment, and the curriculum explicitly states viruses cannot be living because they've no cellular organization, and since it's an all or nothing concept, students basically have to argue one way.
That being said, the arguments for viruses essentially behaving identically to life and perhaps being a precursor to it are compelling, but what is your major contention with the "need 5 to be alive" mantra?
You guys should debate this, but I'm wondering if either of you were taught in biology the old rule "You need all 5 to be alive" the five characteristics being:
1. have cellular organization
2. able to inherit traits
3. maintain homeostasis
4. reproduce
5. metabolize/grow
To RM, um are you stupid?
Do you know what self defense is?
If you asked someone to leave you alone several times IRL and they wouldn't do it, they are now violating your personal space and you have the right to protect yourself given the potential threat from someone who clearly has no regard for your consent.
If anyone, including stupid members of this site, were to fail to leave me alone IRL, I would kick the shit out of them and laugh at the sound of them snoring because they're choking on their own tongue from being strangled so hard.
That sound is nice when it's coming from a true piece of shit.
Leaving me the fuck alone is just better for all, so no one has to get choked out.
Um, if you were to exclude me from one of your debates publicly, I'd have zero problem with it, in fact, I'd feel like I'd done right in the world, and it's not an etiquette charge "mate," it's a "if someone didn't actually leave me alone IRL, I'd fucking kick the shit out of them" charge. I've requested you to leave me alone, you won't, so IRL, this is the point where I'd kick the living shit out of you. Fuck off.
You can't see how someone publicly requesting that you stay away from them requires you to honor that?
Do you violate people's personal space IRL if they've asked you to leave them alone?
Really think here.
Ok, fair point, but I've been given so much crap for not defining every term or omitting particular term's definitions, so I figured I'd be as transparent as possible.
While I appreciate your analysis, if you think about genetic engineering and what it actually is, you may be surprised at how appropriate defining the three terms is.
I've done genetic engineering before, and it's how I'm a father...
I feel like, on one hand, it's impressive that 4 votes were able to be cast within what appears to be a very short time span, but that it's sad that the ability to do it at all is not only valid, but will go unpunished...I'm not even mad, I'm impressed.
I think I finally like Death23.
What I meant by justice is that Virt was going to come in and fix some problems...I was not planning anything, I was referring to moderators bringing forth justice, not me.
Yeah, so I worked my RFD in a similar manner to a vote placed before mine...same smell
The gears of justice move slowly, but move they do indeed.
Yeah sorry man
Also, a coma is completely different than going out from a blood choke...I can see you've never been blood choked before, they're very non-injurious.
Hahaha, I said that if this were IRL, which it is not, and someone refused to leave me alone in my personal space, i would react violently, and I'd assume others would behave that way too.
Seriously, if you made it clear that someone should stay away from you and they didn't IRL, threatening your personal freedom, what would you do?
Dude, I'm the victim of harassers, not the other way around.
Well, I for one do not want any unfair or frivolous votes, just to be clear, but wow.
Who knew I had followers...who like me no less.
What the literal fuck is going on?
The debater told not to participate and the voter told not to participate are participating the most...that's non-sarcastically shocking.
The person uttering nonsense to you (Ramshutu) is literally the person not allowed to vote on or participate in this debate, and now is threatening some member's credibility by saying they're suspicious or whatever.
I find it suspicious that members who were told to refrain from this debate have not been moderated yet and even continue to post on here... I mean how many Restraining Orders does one need to get moderated around here?
That's the real suspicion.
Hey you're the first person to actually follow the rules, thank you reasonableness.
Thanks for the vote
RM, I have no idea what you're talking about.
I wrote 3 rules that disallowed people who were on restraining orders from me because they cannot leave me alone or are incessant harassers of me.
Your debate I voted on did not request that none of those individuals vote or participate, but in this case, THE EXACT people told not to engage with me did so any way.
I want you to think of a time IRL where someone asked you to leave them alone...what would happen if you persisted after they CLEARLY requested you to leave them alone?
Let me see that RM passion and answer honestly.
That a debater requests that rules be followed isn't enough to stop people from voting on debates or participating in them.
You guys are fucking assholes Ramshutu and Death23.
Show some fucking respect for people who wish not to engage with either of you.
Really, both of you need to leave me the fuck alone.
Don't buy it, sorry.
California's a popular place, I suppose.
Yeah, but he overtly accepted my sources that supported the definition that explicitly allowed for the definitions I was using.
It's silly that I even have to point that out.
I use a definition from a source Con accepted as credible, it supported EXACTLY my case for organisms being GMOs, and it negated how "fringe" it was supposed to be because Con's overt acceptance of the source.
I'm sorry you can't look at this in an unbiased way, really.
Also, it's rather odd that you wait such a long time to be on this site, just to pop in and vote up death23, which makes me think this talk to you is pointless, and you're death23.
Hey Death23, nice vote.
Also, thanks for ignoring rule 1 and 3.
Also your vote admitted that the resolution was true, though broad, so noodle that for a while.
"when it comes to actually rapping he actually raps."
If this tautology doesn't compel you, what will?
Oh, I get it...except he just lost by accepting wikipedia's agreement with me.
Ouch.
I was lost by that comment...what was meant by "the red?"
Do school prepare kids for subject-verb agreement?
That's check and mate, and this time I did it 3rd round...nice.
Wow.
I'm making a new rule that only applies to you...no dogs allowed.
Great idea, but whiteflame is the one who told me to ban you from my debates, so I don't have to whine to him; reasonable people already agree with me here.
Yawn requires air not available if this were IRL.
You can't eat popcorn when you're getting choked out.
Hence why IRL this convo would just be you snoring, choking on your tongue.
No popcorn.
You see, the difference is, even if I were to give up my anonymity right now and dox myself right here, given my standing in my community as an educator and coach and the perception of who I am to my children and family at large, I would still say the things I'm saying to you because of your incessant, unregulated harassment of me warrants the aggressive tone and violent words I'm throwing back at you to battle off a persistent harasser who has no regard for my consent.
I would do this in real life every time.
You though...cowards like you on the other hand are using the anonymity of the internet to harass someone who IRL you would never, and I mean NEVER, attempt to fuck with, at all, and you would have left me alone after I asked you to do so on this site over and over again.
IRL, you would not be trying the shit you're trying with me, because you're a coward who uses internet veil to fuck with better, superior, more formidable men who would certainly have no problem eliminating you as the threat that refuses to leave.
Baseball bat choke.
Done.
I expect you to hide behind the internet some more, I'm sure you'll not disappoint; pussies never do.
Oh I know exactly how this is going to go and you're in for a treat.
Also, you're objectively losing; your rounds are typically terrible.
They are the same is what I'm pointing out to you, man, it's the definition the source uses, why didn't you attack it?
Ok, I might put up the debate on the open debates and you can accept it if you like my definitions, so I don't flood these guys' debate comments section.
Oh so you knew I was going to point to the source i cited proving I was right, because you read my whole source's DEFINITION section right?
"What constitutes a genetically modified organism (GMO) is not always clear and can vary widely. At its broadest it can include anything that has had its genes altered, including by nature."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism#Definition
Guess you missed that, huh?
I didn't put it in my 5 to be alive, but it is in the definition of life, because life is actually just a property of organic compounds when they are no longer passive and are actively recruited to fight for the system's survival. Living is an active battling of the environment and the characteristics necessary to have that battle are what define life.
Not having this autonomous characteristic makes it like a passive organic compound whose activity is at the direction of something autonomously living.
I didn't know about parasites for viruses, that's fucking cool, and it does speak to viruses' ability to behave like life.
Are there viruses that autonomously metabolize?
So this topic was actually the essay topic for our district's benchmark assessment, and the curriculum explicitly states viruses cannot be living because they've no cellular organization, and since it's an all or nothing concept, students basically have to argue one way.
That being said, the arguments for viruses essentially behaving identically to life and perhaps being a precursor to it are compelling, but what is your major contention with the "need 5 to be alive" mantra?
You guys should debate this, but I'm wondering if either of you were taught in biology the old rule "You need all 5 to be alive" the five characteristics being:
1. have cellular organization
2. able to inherit traits
3. maintain homeostasis
4. reproduce
5. metabolize/grow
"Go away, I'm baitin'"
I sentence you to 3 years in prison for not allowing someone to continually harass you, says the judge.
To RM, um are you stupid?
Do you know what self defense is?
If you asked someone to leave you alone several times IRL and they wouldn't do it, they are now violating your personal space and you have the right to protect yourself given the potential threat from someone who clearly has no regard for your consent.
If anyone, including stupid members of this site, were to fail to leave me alone IRL, I would kick the shit out of them and laugh at the sound of them snoring because they're choking on their own tongue from being strangled so hard.
That sound is nice when it's coming from a true piece of shit.
Leaving me the fuck alone is just better for all, so no one has to get choked out.
Do you understand self defense?
Fuck off please?
Um, if you were to exclude me from one of your debates publicly, I'd have zero problem with it, in fact, I'd feel like I'd done right in the world, and it's not an etiquette charge "mate," it's a "if someone didn't actually leave me alone IRL, I'd fucking kick the shit out of them" charge. I've requested you to leave me alone, you won't, so IRL, this is the point where I'd kick the living shit out of you. Fuck off.
You can't see how someone publicly requesting that you stay away from them requires you to honor that?
Do you violate people's personal space IRL if they've asked you to leave them alone?
Really think here.
Didn't bother to read the rules?
Please leave me alone.
Ok, fair point, but I've been given so much crap for not defining every term or omitting particular term's definitions, so I figured I'd be as transparent as possible.
While I appreciate your analysis, if you think about genetic engineering and what it actually is, you may be surprised at how appropriate defining the three terms is.
I've done genetic engineering before, and it's how I'm a father...
Never mind, I forgot you're banned from this debate.