I report whiteflame's vote (it won't let me report you have removed my ability to). He is only allowed to give the conduct points there, not the arguments points.
In this debate my opponent plagiarised their round 1 for starters but ignoring that, you can just vote Pro because Pro forfeited after they posted their opening Round and didn't argue since.
You can do whatever you want, I am not sure the issue. The voters can still penalise people posting just 'gg' in their votes but look what I was against here.
Yes in 'choose winner' it gives the total win. If you forfeit 40% but don't FF the person can only give conduct without explanation in the four-section system.
If, after Round 1 of your arguments (even if the first round you argue is the penultimate Round) you forfeit, that counts as a pure FF on the rules. If I post as little as 'gg' I count as not technically forfeiting. The key to not technically forfeiting isn't to avoid the 40% as much as to avoid FF.
The difference isn't in this debate as it's 'winner selection' but in the scenario one forfeits 40%+ but did not FF, you can only give conduct without explanation, not arguments etc.
I will tell after this is over where I think you went wrong here.
In short, you are completely legally allowed to leave all rebuttals to Round 2. That part you can't change. Lancelot is known to dish out new stuff in Round 3 and WF and Oromagi don't punish that at all.
The rest I'll just let you realise in your own time. You have both been much sloppier than I predicted in how this has gone down, I can't predict the winner at this point.
Why is this and the intel vs lxam debate so ridiculous in how loosely it defines 'News'? Lol...
Both Pro debaters let the Con get away with a really abusive definition of News in the descriptions. That is ridiculous. Furthermore distribution is a noun relating to a verb 'distribute', an organisation is a noun referring to a verb 'organise' and in this case to a group of people being organised...
everything about this update is worth looking into and completely undoing.
He had a decent site that was slightly dead but capable of being competitive for debating and made it into a passive shitshow where he robbed us of the rating element massively
That is nowhere near sufficient justification of sources vote, you even mention you would tactically rescind it if you gave him arguments to make it avoid being called a votebomb, right?
I liked this topic choice for me vs you though, it let me see some more of how you and voters understand politics and strategising a society. In hindsight, this was a lopsided topic given that whoever gets Pro, need only hit home that Libertarians have hierarchy and that this interferes with pure freedom and latch onto that, to fundamentally have an unstoppable victory.
I didn't make the error you hint at (the nazis and genocide mistake), I said those parts of it make it instantly go from an anarchy to a tyranny. Clearly I didn't make the case clear enough for you.
😂😂😂
Can you handle my report or not?
The mods don't respect him at all. He has zero influence on this, he just won a position without having a platform and thinks he's hot shit.
I report whiteflame's vote (it won't let me report you have removed my ability to). He is only allowed to give the conduct points there, not the arguments points.
That depends which tags you are adding but if there's some kind of official tournament tag then sure
Enjoy your big L
Please vote on this debate.
I trust you will vote on this.
In this debate my opponent plagiarised their round 1 for starters but ignoring that, you can just vote Pro because Pro forfeited after they posted their opening Round and didn't argue since.
You can do whatever you want, I am not sure the issue. The voters can still penalise people posting just 'gg' in their votes but look what I was against here.
Yes in 'choose winner' it gives the total win. If you forfeit 40% but don't FF the person can only give conduct without explanation in the four-section system.
I will make this clear:
If, after Round 1 of your arguments (even if the first round you argue is the penultimate Round) you forfeit, that counts as a pure FF on the rules. If I post as little as 'gg' I count as not technically forfeiting. The key to not technically forfeiting isn't to avoid the 40% as much as to avoid FF.
The difference isn't in this debate as it's 'winner selection' but in the scenario one forfeits 40%+ but did not FF, you can only give conduct without explanation, not arguments etc.
well no, I lost it because the description says don't forfeit. Also that debate after the site update made it unrated is so stale to me.
Arguing that Islam is authoritarian is like arguing that bread has starch.
please can you moderate his vote
I will tell after this is over where I think you went wrong here.
In short, you are completely legally allowed to leave all rebuttals to Round 2. That part you can't change. Lancelot is known to dish out new stuff in Round 3 and WF and Oromagi don't punish that at all.
The rest I'll just let you realise in your own time. You have both been much sloppier than I predicted in how this has gone down, I can't predict the winner at this point.
Why is this and the intel vs lxam debate so ridiculous in how loosely it defines 'News'? Lol...
Both Pro debaters let the Con get away with a really abusive definition of News in the descriptions. That is ridiculous. Furthermore distribution is a noun relating to a verb 'distribute', an organisation is a noun referring to a verb 'organise' and in this case to a group of people being organised...
Melacharaz is saying that he believes homosexuality is firmly wrong and would fear that his vote would be deemed biased unless he voted for your side.
wylted has engaged in advertising in this thread
The sad part is that's true, the average voter here is garbage.
I guess the update did help me, this is simply bullshit lol, you ignored all my good points.
Not interested in you entertaining his last round blitzkrieg either or not realising that the laws brought later perfectly complimented my Round 1.
if this was still rated as it was pre-update, it would mean I lose rating and Lancelot gains it whereas a no-vote tie wouldn't.
This was not a troll debate, the tied vote needs to be fully justified in its sources allocation.
Whiteflame or supadudz please moderate it. I appeal this decision
It also cannot be physically reported by me, these fools removed my ability to report.
everything about this update is worth looking into and completely undoing.
He had a decent site that was slightly dead but capable of being competitive for debating and made it into a passive shitshow where he robbed us of the rating element massively
i report that vote for sources
Same as lancelot please, I was in 0 unrated debates before this update
This was unrated, I noticed and kept my mouthshut because *** you. Please make all my debates rated.
sure thing wannabe batman
he was not on it to begin with, cheers. Failed stalker.
**** you
Do you get joy when others cry?
Maybe watch movies that encourage healthy masculinity instead of the shit that shaped your psyche.
I am talking to Barney, you are the petty attention seeker inserting yourself. If you want to insert yourself, do not blame me for it.
I do, I can teach you.
That is nowhere near sufficient justification of sources vote, you even mention you would tactically rescind it if you gave him arguments to make it avoid being called a votebomb, right?
I didn't have a meltdown and lancelot is gaslighting me and harassing me.
Put this title into chatgpt, idk, he used it for his other debates and Austin was allowed to accuse him of it too.
His one is plagiarised chatgpt btw
You are meant to vote on who used more reliable sources to bolster their case. You are not meant to vote for whose made you cry more.
Premarital sex is stupid to be against, I get being against hookups but being against lovers doing it is ridiculous.
Piece of shit update, I am so fucking tilted about it.
Please vote if possible
FF overall, easyish vote
hhahahaha he thought he could do so much better than me! LOL!!!!
The debate is complete, if you'd care to vote.
You can ask mods to delete your vote to revote btw, regarding regret votes.
He can get the votes removed due him taking his concession back in Round 5, trust me, he has no integrity.
Wylted is the filthiest liar on here, never underestimate his sleaziness.
Those voting for Wylted are going to give him all 7 points, it would help if you give me all 7 to anticipate votebombs but ty.
You picked the better side, I see that now.
I liked this topic choice for me vs you though, it let me see some more of how you and voters understand politics and strategising a society. In hindsight, this was a lopsided topic given that whoever gets Pro, need only hit home that Libertarians have hierarchy and that this interferes with pure freedom and latch onto that, to fundamentally have an unstoppable victory.
I didn't make the error you hint at (the nazis and genocide mistake), I said those parts of it make it instantly go from an anarchy to a tyranny. Clearly I didn't make the case clear enough for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmuyvKvtPXc