Novice

Well, for a weeks time for an argument, such a weak one could only be described as a feat of something.
Almost every point is ridiculous:
1. Quantity and Popularity, 2. Profit, 3. Cuisine
Chicken is the front runner in none of these categories.

I believe the debate is a forgone conclusion based on a lack of rudimentary research by the instigator.

A little...short? Especially for a three round 10k character debate.
At least respect all the other arguments by adressing them

The obvious intellectual capacity of making a 1000 character debate have two weeks for arguments

ComputerNerd...do you understand what a joke means?
Also, Conservalectual wasn't even talking to you, he was responding to the unexpected nature as it seems...?

Welcome back

Okay, that was unexpected

Now obviously I am taking the opportunity to (as some would say) "mess around," given that I am making my new account in a few days, I will be happy to follow this debate with some level of interest.

Say goodbye to your undefeated streak my friend

I don't see why you would concede this, but nothing surprising I suppose. I don't think either argument was particularly good so it could have gone either way at this stage.

Okay. I don't really have to engage with such an obvious bad faith and dishonest statement other than to point out it is bad faith and dishonest

Let me start by saying I do not care if you are a trans person no matter how many times you mention it. Of course, we must see your daily reminder. While you whine that this site is heavily based against you, this isn't true in any way, and I could care less about your attempts to proport self pity.

1. "half a dozen people"
Learn to count.

2. "the problem is that you're an idiot"
Projecting.

I will make my new account, maybe go on an undefeated run, and then hang it up for good I think. It's just been ruined for me.

I would absolutely beat you on that topic, but I am just not interested in debates anymore after all the issues I have had with voters.
I have conceded to ADOL, debates on this site are just...not worth it. The joy is gone because of how many people vote with spite and use
their bias and personal issues in the voting block.

So that's why I have not accepted.

I'm just telling you in case you believe you have made a valid point, I suppose.

Sure, thanks? I mean the truth never fails. It's like I said, I don't feel well, today. It has already cost me a debate, and I'm not totally upset if it costs me a gish gallop.

I can't respond to your gish gallop but essentially everything you have said is wrong, especially on the genetic fallacy.

I am very sick currently so I wanted to make those responses to be clear about them.

One thing I should mention is that I actually like Barney, as my narrow general default liking for everyone extends to him. I am saying these things to help ham because he has to understand these things. No ill will from my side, it is, I promise, out of concern

You get some, you don't get some is the unfortunate nature of operating under a schedul;e that does not permit a bulk of activity

"It is possible you don't know that under another username, Ragnar is not just the top voter on this site, he is also an author of some of the voting standards. He wrote the rules you are claiming he doesn't understand."

Genetic fallacy or fallacy of origins. Just because someone created or playeda role in creating somthing, it does not follow that they automatically can (in practice) excersize such fucntion based on the criteria they may have created to a sufficent degree. For example: Thomas Jefferson the parimary writer of the declaration of independence clearly documented that "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" but he also had slaves.

"oof. do you not know what the fuck you are talking about. If you think ad homs in comments section are going to win you points, then you are the dummy. You got to be cool in your debate demeanor, cool in comments, classier than your opponent- that's how you win debates. Sour grapes convinces no voters"

This is not an ad hominem. An ad hominem is saying someone falls under the label of an insult therefore their conclusion is false. Barney is wrong for all the reasons I will be documenting behind the scenes. I am saying here that:

p1) People who aren't stupid can vote effectively
p2) Barney is stupid
c) Therefore, Barney cannot vote effectively

So I am saying he is stupid to justify the conclusion that he cannot vote effectively, while being stupid appears to be one of the reasons, it is not all of them. I'm just seeking alternative means because of this trait.

Everything is fair enough, I suppose

Just not able to have posted what I wanted this time

I had Covid, I didn't have enough time.

Another thing to note, none of what I am saying is personal. You are simply objectively an idiot. I have no personal feelings twoards you, but I am trying to help you or provide assistance.

I think you are too incapable of understanding conversations meant for different people. By this I mean people who are perhaps more reasonable to different degrees. However I feel obligated to provide some sort of reassuring statement here so don't worry, it will be taken care of.

Now, as stupid and ridiculous as you are, It has been made clear to me that many other people (many of which have messaged me personally) actually have similar views as myself on you and your perpetual idiocy, so I believe I am fine in that regard.

Thank you for your extended concern.

I think it's extremely pathetic, and it really hurts me to berate you in this way because I tend to be an extremely kind person, but it's for your own good.

I will even admit that this could be a case of your genuine stupidity, which appears to be more likely comming from you, but I hope I can use means behind the scenes to get the evaluations I would prefer. You are simply on too low of an level for me to even begin to provide any form of education to you, and honestly, you are over 30 years old. That was your teachers job.

Barney is an imbecile that would rather take out his personal issues rather than be objective.

My point was that wealthy people don't even have to eat meat, so the argument is that even if you made a counter that it is necessary to survive therefore they deserve its consumption, it would be irrelevant.

This keeps happening, but when it is a result of the same person constantly, I have no choice but to conclude that Barney is incompetent. Either he just doesn't know or understand how to vote in debates, he is simply too stupid to do it effectively, or he is excersizing an action of personal bias, which doesn't make sense to me. Even if you have something against me, why would it reflect in the voters tab?

What are you talking about? I meant eat meat? When did I say otherwise that I made a mistake?

Vote casted that is irrelevant to any aspect of the debate

The vote is not even relevant to anything, I don't even know what he is talking about. Barney is an idiot, so I understand the more cognitive reasons, but I can't keep taking this.

No, I'm tired of this. There is no way this vote is actually justified. This constantly happens.

Just as a gesture of clarification of any (obvious) ignorance on specific fallacies, which I imagine would have some benefit, it is good to maintain that simply responding to an argument in a nuanced is not gish galloping, or is using slightly more sources, most especially in an organized format.

I will debate you on the exact same topic

Especially with one week for arguments

Because of the resolution I feel that you should have won this debate.

I regret making time for arguments for 3 days.
This is an 8,000 character debate. It need not be this way.

I don't get it, why does he always forfeit?

Uhhh...you made a big mistake

I would even accept the votes if they actually addressed points I made, but it
seems very very close minded for me to do so having read them both.
Feels like more of an attempt to make a certain person win.

Even analyzing certain points of them, don't appear to make sense at all. '
I can't really say anything about anyone's understanding or goals, but what
I can suppose is the unfortunate nature of the situation.

I understand that you need to capitalize on the opportunity to be passive aggressive to me after two votes have been
cast against me, but honestly speaking, they simply aren't good votes, they both just ignore most of the arguments I make.
I don't really take an active critique with votes any more because it ends up being a waste of time, but if every vote casted
has to simply not address my points, it's impossible to conclude they are fair.

Sure, I mean, I don't see anything wrong with flying the confederate flag. It has a nice design as well.

Please vote (anyone else), and I ask this time if you do you address the arguments in the debate please

I want to say this, I am not forcing anyone to vote, nor would I attempt too. I am pinging people who seem to be relatively active/are in this comments section.

(If anyone does vote, I do ask for a good reading of the arguments)

Appears you two have some interest in this debate If you wanted to vote

I'm so tired of getting unvoted ties when I clearly win debates.

It appears the streak continues

Get ready to vote!