I agreed until the last line you wrote. This is clearly loaded as fuck, allowing Con to divert any racial disparity in treatment to a cause other than the racism.
I have actually avoided voting certain debates like this that I think Mall defeated you in as you assume too hard that your one punch responses actually cut deep into his case.
Establishing BoP is not enough, defense alone won't even beat below average debaters, it only defeats the worst at their worst.
You had to prove reading should not be made illegal and your only justification was that freedom to write and speak was legally established.
There is an art to debating lazily, you are better when you try harder. If you put in 60% more effort into these debates, Mall would be cornered.
Actually I got the history slightly wrong but it is not relevant. Taiwan's enemy was Mao but they never admitted he won to later admit he was couped. That is how it worked... lol
it isn't a flaw though, if you follow Novice's Round 2.
In fact Oromagi's way of exploring the lesser sentience of animals was so bad here that Novice got away with not at all proving that the animals have their sentience.
Biden is incompetent as fuck. Another old fossil like Trump that cannot resist a power grab even ad dementia huts.
It is sad, blatant and the denial of it is just clinging to some blind loyalty to the wing and hatred of Trump.
The man does not just fuck up speeches, he walks the wrong way off stages such that his wife has to guide him by embracing his arm and pulling him by it. He said go brandon and smiled, in response to a sarcastic live questioner that switched tone fast to bait him, you could see his wife wince.
Based on the framework and arguments in the debate, Pro has not explained how any of their opponents are good and argues nobody on DART is truly good relative to all world debaters. Therefore NO.
Your entire argument 3, which is actually argument 2 as BoP assignment isn't an argument, violated the prior one by saying all that whiteflame and Bones defeated are not good. You are not even mentally taking in what I am typing, you are replying only to attack and defend. Stop and take in what I say.
Nobody that whiteflame has defeated is good without proving they are good.
In proving they are good, you then proved that Barney is good on the same metric. You just are too blinded by ego right now to consider what I am saying is true. You defeated your own contentions by several contradictions.
If that is what I am and you ignore when I have defeated high winrate debaters such as Novice on his old account here, your system is fundamentally flawed.
Furthermore, Barney as Ragnar on DDO amd here has a 100% winrate against debaters of high winrate when and if they clashed, including Oromagi on DDO and Novice on DART and now yourself, who you may consider good.
This brings into question why the scope ignores outside of DART if your entire second contention violates it.
I definitely see narcissism and ASPD (psychopath/sociopath) traits in him.
Biden is a snake who went from being racist and making inappropriate close movements to young girls to being the barely put together man he is now, cleaner and yet clumsier with his words and moves all at once.
All politicians in the regular public eye that do not want to quit are mildly narcissistic, that is a given. It is actually a necessity for them to enjoy their otherwise stressful and shitty jobs, the eo rush from attention and the reward of seeing their opposition get worse press than them is the primary fuel that motivates them to keep going.
Actions can 100% be racist.
Intent is all estimation and guesswork. Even if someone 'admits' their intent, they could be partially lying even to themselves.
No it doesn't. Look at the title and what it's making Pro have to defend.
You can't prove racism within people, you can only prove racist tendencies in what they do or say.
I agreed until the last line you wrote. This is clearly loaded as fuck, allowing Con to divert any racial disparity in treatment to a cause other than the racism.
if misterchris allows this to be rated, I should have had my free wins vs type1 and that recent one you deleted whiteflame too.
This is not a genuine human vs human debate and is not fair for novice to gain rating from.
that is morally completely wrong and you fucking know it
You think you being vs an AI should be rated?
Thank you, Senpai Freimu.
The debate is still rated.
Michael forgot to make this unrated, please edit it as mods
Man oh man, if I had just turned up I really think I win this.
I will still try.
Are you interested to vote on this? One day left to vote.
Use your brain better before you embarass yourself.
Con cannot win
Thanks for the vote. I intentionally distracted during this once Mall had admitted the very thing needed for me to win.
I get why it can't be done but there is a pun since oromagi is homosexual...
oroMAGi
think about a 3-letter word to replace the uppercase part.
Click accept
Read the title of the debate, then decide who is the pivoter.
All bullies are sociopathic, all, every. Single. One.
They often do not be severe enough for long enough obviously enough to get diagnosed with ASPD or narcissism though.
I pivoted just like you did with TWS when he stated observations of Biden.
Public choice is forcing votes for Novice, he says writing at the start of his rfd then changes to reading as he rushes the vote.
I have actually avoided voting certain debates like this that I think Mall defeated you in as you assume too hard that your one punch responses actually cut deep into his case.
Establishing BoP is not enough, defense alone won't even beat below average debaters, it only defeats the worst at their worst.
You had to prove reading should not be made illegal and your only justification was that freedom to write and speak was legally established.
There is an art to debating lazily, you are better when you try harder. If you put in 60% more effort into these debates, Mall would be cornered.
Actually I got the history slightly wrong but it is not relevant. Taiwan's enemy was Mao but they never admitted he won to later admit he was couped. That is how it worked... lol
I forgot to attribute this source:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762689
for my second-last (big) quote. Sorry.
vote if you wish, thanks if you do.
it isn't a flaw though, if you follow Novice's Round 2.
In fact Oromagi's way of exploring the lesser sentience of animals was so bad here that Novice got away with not at all proving that the animals have their sentience.
It actually does mean that, you are saying using the argument wins the debate regardless of execution or what the opponent said.
It is the very same blindness driving all the people who voted against Novice in this debate.
Your vote was promised to always favour the human supremacist, mine is the openminded approach.
I could say the opposite to you. I am entitled to vote as I want.
And I wouldn't.
It is human supremacist bigotry, plain and simple.
Biden is incompetent as fuck. Another old fossil like Trump that cannot resist a power grab even ad dementia huts.
It is sad, blatant and the denial of it is just clinging to some blind loyalty to the wing and hatred of Trump.
The man does not just fuck up speeches, he walks the wrong way off stages such that his wife has to guide him by embracing his arm and pulling him by it. He said go brandon and smiled, in response to a sarcastic live questioner that switched tone fast to bait him, you could see his wife wince.
28 days no clarification.
has whiteflame defeated good debater YES OR NO.
Based on the framework and arguments in the debate, Pro has not explained how any of their opponents are good and argues nobody on DART is truly good relative to all world debaters. Therefore NO.
has barney defeated good debaters YES OR NO
NO by the same logic.
Your entire argument 3, which is actually argument 2 as BoP assignment isn't an argument, violated the prior one by saying all that whiteflame and Bones defeated are not good. You are not even mentally taking in what I am typing, you are replying only to attack and defend. Stop and take in what I say.
I meant the DDO goat reference and his entire second contention blatantly violated his own thesis and its scope.
BoP isn't a contention so by second I mean what he calls 3.
Nobody that whiteflame has defeated is good without proving they are good.
In proving they are good, you then proved that Barney is good on the same metric. You just are too blinded by ego right now to consider what I am saying is true. You defeated your own contentions by several contradictions.
I did not base it on that, that was one of many examples of you violating the scope that you then needed to stay true to.
Report the vote and we will see.
If that is what I am and you ignore when I have defeated high winrate debaters such as Novice on his old account here, your system is fundamentally flawed.
Furthermore, Barney as Ragnar on DDO amd here has a 100% winrate against debaters of high winrate when and if they clashed, including Oromagi on DDO and Novice on DART and now yourself, who you may consider good.
This brings into question why the scope ignores outside of DART if your entire second contention violates it.
2 weeks for this but please vote when you can.
Please vote
Please vote and consider empty rounds from Mall equal to a forfeited Round from Con if possible.
Care to vote? If so, ty.
So the high win record makes the opponent themselves good?
I definitely see narcissism and ASPD (psychopath/sociopath) traits in him.
Biden is a snake who went from being racist and making inappropriate close movements to young girls to being the barely put together man he is now, cleaner and yet clumsier with his words and moves all at once.
All politicians in the regular public eye that do not want to quit are mildly narcissistic, that is a given. It is actually a necessity for them to enjoy their otherwise stressful and shitty jobs, the eo rush from attention and the reward of seeing their opposition get worse press than them is the primary fuel that motivates them to keep going.
What makes anyone on your list good?
Reply only with arguments that you made in the debate.
https://youtu.be/uTh0gyaOoO0
That word is spelled rationale not rational, FYI.
Because you are a toxic person that I do not want spamming me abuse or telling me that my mother would rather have had a period than had me.
You only like me when it suits you.
Would you like someone to vote against you with a good vote?
It is very easy to restrict a debate by minimum rating.
Your description doesnt say it is a rule.