Whiteflame warned me before to not help voters who voted for me make their votes better. I am not sure I can say any more than I said there, please ask barney or whiteflame for more assistance.
You should compare the arguments, mention what they were etc, explain why one convinced you even.
As for sources how they are used is also relevant, not just the sources themselves. It is fine to leave sources tied and not justify that. If you believe a side used them better and/or had more reliable sources to a degree worth a vote, explain and contrast some.
You didn't even cover what the arguments were nor contrast sources. I am happy you voted for me obviously but you must be trolling. That will just get deleted.
You can @whiteflame or barney and ask for it to be removed. You can write your reasoning here right now, comment by comment and link to each via the orange number at the top right of the comments' URLs.
You either know what you have done or you are too stupid to reason with. Considering that your title and definitions are a blatantly combined trap, it's the former.
Socialism doing X better than Capitalism? First define the latter and explain how pure vs reformed both systems of comparison are and the measures of success being contrasted.
10 x 30k chars means we are expecting voters to vote from a 300k char read and downwards.
Aside from reducing either Rounds or chars, I'd appreciate this to be a topic. Socialism is not a debate resolution or topic, it has zero context as in what is it we are arguing?
what i think is this. This is con-favoured but definitely losable if voters sympathise with your causes of libertarianism enough.
Your rating vs where i'm at... that drop will hurt me a lot.
risk vs reward, i admit you're able to beat me at this topic potentially and don't fancy the risk of that drop.
get your rating to the 1600s and i'll perhaps risk a topic like this, it really is a numbers game. I am genuinely aiming to be number one rated now and this just isnt worth it to me.
Due to the forfeits it is an easy vote in my opinion but even without it, observe the description vs the debate.
Interesting read, in my opinion, I have actually had a trans person I interacted with admit I have a really good point and changed their view of what they are in terms of the mechanics of being a feminine male rather than the same as a ciswoman. They thanked me sincerely and were impressed.
I do not agree with the idea that Oromagi broke the deacription's rule(s) and I am jot sure either side fully established the cut-off point to declare it to be overturned.
I am busy and not really that into this debate and honestly you would not want me to vote you 14-8 instead of 7-4. This debate is hard to read fast, it is so many nitpicky details.
yeah, glancing the debate anything other than arguments is wrong here for either side. I may vote actually but not within a few hours' time, give half a day.
"You can't get deported so long as you have not done anything illegal."
The issue is the opposite, you can't leave other than to your citizenship country if your visa has run out. I'm not here to debate it, you are flipping around the issue:
That is deeply hypocritical then (it's also not at all negating those that don't and won't allow it if born and residing in US from the birth).
You're saying it's right for US to strip but not for other nations to in any way strip so as to enable the US doing it.
Even if I agreed with you, I had a side to debate and it was what it was. If you want a rematch, please make it 1 week per and longer characters, both of us were cucked by the character count here and I can't do 2 days on something like this as I admit you are a competent enough debater to demand me to break out of my lazier default style and that requires attention and effort that my real life is not going to allow. I can be on this website pretty much every 2 days but not always for many hours necessarily.
A visa holder in US that is a citizen of no nation can't leave the US. There's so many issues for other nations taking them in to even legally recognise or handle them, you gave no time-frame for your project of repealing the citizenship or explanation why they don't deserve to define what being American is rather than you with your 'pride' and patriotic take.
That would be the essence of my Round 3 response and we would be back at square one but I do not deny that I should have posted that in Round 2.
shame this was unrated, caught me by surprise.
I did put a right URL but you had to scroll past an elephant article to get to the lion one.
https://sciencing.com/difference-between-male-female-lions-8639894.html
Use this URL, I'll correct in next Round.
still needs votes, ty if you do
was FF pls vote ty
It is an FF. Ty in advance
Just follow me. I know the rules of the street here.
If Con's sole post was in a later Round there are exceptions but this Round 1 vs the forfeit counts as FF
Would either of you be interested to (please) vote on those debate?
bump
change it to pay gap or salary gap and I will accept.
Wage gap doesn't exist, you are correct. I know what wage vs salary is.
Whiteflame warned me before to not help voters who voted for me make their votes better. I am not sure I can say any more than I said there, please ask barney or whiteflame for more assistance.
You should compare the arguments, mention what they were etc, explain why one convinced you even.
As for sources how they are used is also relevant, not just the sources themselves. It is fine to leave sources tied and not justify that. If you believe a side used them better and/or had more reliable sources to a degree worth a vote, explain and contrast some.
Where did you.justify the arguments vote?
You didn't even cover what the arguments were nor contrast sources. I am happy you voted for me obviously but you must be trolling. That will just get deleted.
You can @whiteflame or barney and ask for it to be removed. You can write your reasoning here right now, comment by comment and link to each via the orange number at the top right of the comments' URLs.
That is not a valid reason...
Please unblock me if you want me to accept and defeat you.
Debate is done
Silentu soyboy, mi instruu vin kiel fari konservativan propagandon.
Was FF by me, that was a brutal timing by him which as luck on his part as he didnt know what I was doing or not.
I am confused why he planned the schedule that way, so GG
You timed it well.
delete the description's definitions and i'll accept
You either know what you have done or you are too stupid to reason with. Considering that your title and definitions are a blatantly combined trap, it's the former.
I agree that you know how to abuse descriptions.
your definitions are why you will abusively win
Semantic nonsense game as per the description
Socialism existing? That is an easy Pro win.
Socialism doing X better than Capitalism? First define the latter and explain how pure vs reformed both systems of comparison are and the measures of success being contrasted.
10 x 30k chars means we are expecting voters to vote from a 300k char read and downwards.
Aside from reducing either Rounds or chars, I'd appreciate this to be a topic. Socialism is not a debate resolution or topic, it has zero context as in what is it we are arguing?
what i think is this. This is con-favoured but definitely losable if voters sympathise with your causes of libertarianism enough.
Your rating vs where i'm at... that drop will hurt me a lot.
risk vs reward, i admit you're able to beat me at this topic potentially and don't fancy the risk of that drop.
get your rating to the 1600s and i'll perhaps risk a topic like this, it really is a numbers game. I am genuinely aiming to be number one rated now and this just isnt worth it to me.
This description is why I support queers over trans.
FF please vote ty
I actually thought it was said Jee - Eye - Eff as I was around the first people to use GIFs and people irl didn't say it out loud much.
FF cheers
Same time Barney asked you what you thought of him. You just made yourself look stupid.
You are the coward.
bumped as 1 day left to vote
bumped as 1 day left to vote
What the fuck is this? this guy is handing novice free wins intentionally:
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3853-the-majority-of-current-policing-racial-disparities-in-the-united-states-are-a-result-of-police-racism
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3852-the-majority-of-current-policing-racial-disparities-in-the-united-states-are-a-result-of-police-racism
Thanks for the vote.
I actually think you did not fully grasp either Pro's not my case, though. Especially not my rebuttals to Pro.
Due to the forfeits it is an easy vote in my opinion but even without it, observe the description vs the debate.
Interesting read, in my opinion, I have actually had a trans person I interacted with admit I have a really good point and changed their view of what they are in terms of the mechanics of being a feminine male rather than the same as a ciswoman. They thanked me sincerely and were impressed.
Are you interested to vote on this debate? 2 days left
Please vote if you find time.
I do not agree with the idea that Oromagi broke the deacription's rule(s) and I am jot sure either side fully established the cut-off point to declare it to be overturned.
I am busy and not really that into this debate and honestly you would not want me to vote you 14-8 instead of 7-4. This debate is hard to read fast, it is so many nitpicky details.
yeah, glancing the debate anything other than arguments is wrong here for either side. I may vote actually but not within a few hours' time, give half a day.
"You can't get deported so long as you have not done anything illegal."
The issue is the opposite, you can't leave other than to your citizenship country if your visa has run out. I'm not here to debate it, you are flipping around the issue:
can't leave is the polar opposite to can't stay.
"There is nothing at all in our legal system that forces people to stay in America against their will."
Citizens* because the others get deported or the citizens can be arrested.
That is deeply hypocritical then (it's also not at all negating those that don't and won't allow it if born and residing in US from the birth).
You're saying it's right for US to strip but not for other nations to in any way strip so as to enable the US doing it.
Even if I agreed with you, I had a side to debate and it was what it was. If you want a rematch, please make it 1 week per and longer characters, both of us were cucked by the character count here and I can't do 2 days on something like this as I admit you are a competent enough debater to demand me to break out of my lazier default style and that requires attention and effort that my real life is not going to allow. I can be on this website pretty much every 2 days but not always for many hours necessarily.
My attack is about feasibility, it was not about impossibility, which would be what I explain in Round 3.
A visa holder in US that is a citizen of no nation can't leave the US. There's so many issues for other nations taking them in to even legally recognise or handle them, you gave no time-frame for your project of repealing the citizenship or explanation why they don't deserve to define what being American is rather than you with your 'pride' and patriotic take.
That would be the essence of my Round 3 response and we would be back at square one but I do not deny that I should have posted that in Round 2.
Dude my Round 1 literally has it as the core point, I just didn't bullet point how many rights or abilities to do things are lost.
I think B is now your daddy and you are the cheeky son of a B.