MisterChris's avatar

MisterChris

*Moderator*

A member since

5
10
11

Total comments: 964

-->
@User_2006

I'll leave that joke up to interpretation LOL

Created:
0

Spanking is great, I do it all the time! Oh... wait...

Created:
0

If you were to make the time for arguments a week, perhaps I'd take it

Created:
0

Humans playing God never works well. There are always unintended consequences.

Created:
0
-->
@CaptainSceptic

It is helpful to define some terms beforehand for the ease of judging. If you're going to use particularly technical terms definitions will be helpful, but discussing the electromagnetic spectrum and the like is inherent in the topic. Really, you can just use your best judgement.

Created:
0
-->
@CaptainSceptic

Alright cool. Thank you and good luck

Created:
0

If you make the time for argument a week I will accept

Created:
0
-->
@Barney

There's obviously limitations as to what they can do. But those limitations don't come from the business itself, it comes from a regulating entity (government, religion, etc.). If the business wants to define a goal/responsibility outside of profit and strive for it, it is free to do so, but I don't think it is a requirement for them to have one.

Created:
1

The only social responsibility a company has is to make a service or product that turns a profit.

Created:
0
-->
@blamonkey

Very helpful analysis, thank you

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

well done to you as well, I need to come up with some more interesting topics soon though!

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

oh yes, my apologies

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

I reject your rejection of my concession

Created:
0

Bump. This needs votes.

Created:
1
-->
@TheJackle

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: TheJackle // Mod action: Not Removed (borderline)
>Points Awarded: 1:0; 1 point to Pro.
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
The vote was borderline. By default, borderline votes are ruled to be sufficient.
Remember:
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:
(1) survey the main arguments and counter arguments presented in the debate,
(2) weigh those arguments against each other (or explain why certain arguments need not be weighed based on what transpired within the debate itself), and
(3) 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.

While this vote did not do a great job, it touches enough bases to be borderline.
**************************************************

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

You're good to post whenever you feel ready. I have enough free time to survive :)

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

I agree that it is good practice to only introduce new material in constructive. I should probably specify that more in my Structure section next time.

Created:
0
-->
@blamonkey

That is a necessary complication unfortunately.

Created:
0
-->
@K_Michael

This seems too uncontroversial to be debated properly. The question "do animals have moral weight?" is one of (almost) complete agreement. If you were to refine the question to say: "can X amount of animals outweigh 1 human life?" then maybe you'd get some takers.

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

Looking forward to a good debate.

Created:
0
-->
@whiteflame

Sure. I see the resolution as covering the course of the outbreak anyway. By "response" I mean all that has taken place until now.

Created:
0
-->
@fauxlaw

All good! I also appreciate your little commentary on my point, that gives me a few ideas to make my arguments stronger.

Created:
0
-->
@Death23

So be it, I will try to not forfeit.

Created:
0
-->
@Death23

Actually, if I'm honest, I have struggled to find time this week. I will likely struggle to have it the next time around too. For the sake of my sanity, would you be alright with canning this one right now? I think we should commit to a more full debate on it between us, maybe during my spring break.

Created:
0
-->
@Death23

Thanks for accepting!

Created:
0
-->
@Zaradi

I'm not a fan of kritiks... maybe I am a bore.

Created:
0

This is a really cool one where I don't have a particular opinion. I might've taken it but I'm too busy atm. Looking forward to following this one though

Created:
1
-->
@oromagi

Thanks for the vote. I did not mean to insult those who have no job, instead I meant that a large percentage of those who can't work struggle to hold a job because of addiction. I should have linked stats.

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

What I say in a debate in order to win may be different than what I actually believe. These comments more closely reflect my actual opinion over the debate. I would debate further but Ragnar had a fair point, if we are going to this much trouble we might as well make our own debate

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

That does not make sense. If a company mass produces mud pies, then is my wage based on how much a single mud pie is worth? Clearly not. Apple does not pay all their factory workers 500 dollars an hour despite their phones being worth upwards of $1000 each. Wages are not determined by how much a single product is worth, it is determined based on how companies can maximize profit while managing to keep enough employees. Supply and demand does not determine wages as much as living cost and profit. In that sense, a lower wage would be useless to most companies. Too few workers would be willing to work for that. But there are places in which there are little job alternatives, especially for unskilled, minority laborers. This hurts them and brings no net benefit to the rest of the country.

That is not to say that supply and demand does not have a role. Again, I believe virtually any employee is able to produce minimum wages' worth. If jobs need to be filled for less value, then minimum wage actually serves a positive role in technological innovation. Companies would be forced to innovate new robotic production lines rather than have minority slave armies.

Created:
0
-->
@Speedrace

Thanks for taking the time to vote Speed!

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

As I said, there is virtually no one incapable of producing above minimum wage labor.

Created:
0
-->
@Barney

Thanks for the vote!

Created:
0
-->
@David
@Vader
@Speedrace

If you guys have the time, a quick vote would be appreciated.

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

You again miss the fact that employers will inevitably take advantage of workers who have no alternatives.

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

I see what your reasoning is. Your weighing would make sense if I had not responded to his first point:

"There is virtually no one that is unable to produce minimum wage dollars worth of services to start off working. 90% of Americans over 25 years have finished high school, and the generations that haven't are dying off. In 2016, people with high school degrees earned an average of $35,615 per year."

This directly refutes the idea that any substantial amount of people can't produce more than 5 dollars an hour. Even if a thousand people are the exception, we must weigh in my favor since there are many more being hurt than helped.

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

Quote: "1. Many employees won't be willing to stay if the minimum wage is lowered. But some will. If companies can maintain some amount of employees and lower wages, they will. This hurts mainly immigrants, minorities and non-skilled workers who will be more willing to stay for lower pay because they have never had any alternatives."

This proves 2 things:

a. Removing minimum wage decreases employment overall as many employees will leave seeking higher pay.
b. Those who stay are disproportionately disadvantaged and will simply be hurt further.

Neither of these ideas were challenged properly.
Therefore, my main issue with your vote is that you can not bring in completely new reasoning to refute my arguments, because they simply were not challenged in the debate.

Created:
0
-->
@Christen

I don't think your vote weighs the content or assesses my arguments fairly, but I thank you for the effort anyhow.

Created:
0
-->
@DynamicSquid

Thanks for the nice mini-debate! I had fun

Created:
0
-->
@David

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Virtuoso // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 0:4; 4 points to Pro.
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
To award argument points, the voter must:
(1) survey the main argument and counterargument 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.
If there is no counterargument to the vast majority of arguments, as is the case in this debate, then the voter may (and should) decide to flow through uncontested arguments to award argument points.
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.
In this case, Virtuoso gave two reasons to award conduct points: "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.'"
PLEASE NOTE: Virtuoso identified and explained misconduct, but Virtuoso did not properly compare the conduct of the two debaters. Overall, though, this vote is of high enough quality to reach site standards.

- christopher_best, Vote Moderator
**************************************************

Created:
0
-->
@Pinkfreud08

A lot of reports are made to waste moderator time unfortunately, I tend to just default to not removing tied votes.

Created:
0
-->
@Pinkfreud08

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Pinkfreud08 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 0:1; 1 point to Pro.
>Reason for Decision: See Vote Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
In essence, this vote was just too vague and ignored just too many factors (i.e arguments, G&S, sourcing)... This can be avoided in the future by just commenting on the core contention (and the main counterpoint or the lack thereof), listing a single source you found important (if voting sources), saying what conduct violation distracted you (if voting conduct)... You need not write a thesis but some minimal level of detail is required to verify knowledge of what you're grading. In this case, if you wished to vote "tie" on all other categories then some level of presented reasoning is required, especially with the arguments category (which is the meat of the debate.)
**************************************************

Created:
0
-->
@Pinkfreud08

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Pinkfreud08 // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 0:0; Tied.
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards.
There are three types of tied votes:
(1) Ones which allot zero points. They have no meaningful impact on the debate outcome, and are thus only moderated if warranted for other reasons.
(2) Ones which cancel themselves out. While the category assignments may serve as feedback to the debaters, there is no still meaningful impact for moderation consider. These are in essence the same as the previous type.
(3) Votes which leave arguments tied, but assign other categories. While these need not meet the sufficiency standards for an argument vote, they must still evaluate arguments enough to justify no clear winner. There is however an exception for >=50% forfeitures allowing conduct only with no further explanation.
Further reading: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1718/moderation-and-tied-votes
**************************************************

Created:
0
-->
@mairj23

For once, I'll agree with you that it is disgraceful and unpatriotic that many Americans have responded by being sympathetic to terrorism. At the same time, I don't think this is really relating to race.

Created:
1
-->
@SirAnonymous

Correct, I apologize for any inconvenience with my mistake.

Created:
0

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: [SirAnonymous] // Mod action: [Not Removed]

>Points Awarded: [0:0; 0 points to Pro, and 0 points to Con]

>Reason for Decision: [RFD in comments.]

>Reason for Mod Action: [The vote was found to be sufficient per the site voting policy standards. Please also note that a tied vote has little measurable impact on debate outcome aside from commentary on the debate.]
************************************************************************

Created:
0
-->
@PoliceSheep

Valid points, but personally I disagree. Good topic though.

Created:
0
-->
@crossed

thanks for a cool topic

Created:
0
-->
@Dr.Franklin

I'm awfully busy but I'll do my best to leave one.

Created:
0