Kritiking is to make it so the debate takes a dynamic that denies the entire 'fight' is supposed to be happening.
To Kritik this topic initially would be to deny that assault rifles are even a correct category to exist (or as they exist, are wrong) in the first place. This means they agree with you that it may be one by name but disagree on the validity of the semantics of 'assault rifle'. Another Kritik would be to challenge you on the AR-15 existing at all (ridiculous as it sounds, I am trying to highlight 2 fundamental ways to Kritik 'this is not that' type of debate resolutions).
"AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934."
"If someone calls an AR-15-style rifle an “assault weapon,” then they’ve been duped by an agenda. The only real way to define what is an “assault weapon” is politically, as in how any given law chooses to define the term—this is why the states that have banned this category of semiautomatic firearms have done so with very different definitions."
Thanks for proportionally voting, although I don't understand this round-by-round analysis of what is really a 5 v 5 debate, where quality should be the scaling.
Wtf at my typos... Anyway, congrats on the win Virtuoso. I don't agree with it, nor do I regret in engaging in this. I have learned more about who votes on these and who has what taste. The 'ecosystem' of voters on music has definitely changed, had we had this debate months ago with the same songs, I predict I'd win.
Disregarding something as rock is up to tje voter, not song poster. Ita obcious you like softer music, he abused the edges of the genre to achieve that. I was apoealing to truer rock fans or people seeking rock in its raw intense form.
Perhaps you guys would like this, not sure what your taste is in rock, but I am honestly proud of my selection in this. I loved Rock, had a real emo phase (in my DDO days was still somewhat in the phase), Rock understands anger and sadness like no other genre in my opinion.
yes, but you can justify banning him from accepting debates maybe. The latter is up to the mods' discretion, but the voting is always allowed even with blocks.
No Ramshutu. You are only the hero in the eyes of fellow villains of this website. One day others will come and see what you are and I am and I promise you, the narrative won't favour you.
Ragnar and Oromagi are guaranteed votes against me in that debate. Much like here, I can objectively annihilate my opponent, turning all their points against themselves even... And the voter will say I didn't touch on the points at all, ignore what I raised and say it wasn't relevant when the very definition of 'colonization' undeniably means that my points were all relevant, brutally so.
In the flat earth being possible debate, they will change the word 'possible' to mean 'probable' just the opposite of what they did to vote against Sparrow in the 'RM can't prove that I am Type1' debates where they allowed your bad faith definitions of 'can' because they sadistically wanted to see him lose and liked the voting-ring corruption you guys got going with each other. I already know how the debate will end. They will vote against me saying it's too ridiculous and improbable what I suggested because the 'reliable scientists' all said so.
You come from the assumption that it's wrong to discredit a group that is entitled to deep government security clearance and never can be truly audited. You speak so fondly of people who have you under their thumb whether or not they are lying, because they can and will control what you do and do not know as they see fit and are legally entitled to do so, including lying.
They can falsify data as they please and the only ones who ever would stop them all serve their agenda. That is why the red 'V' looking symbol, which refers to the number of the beast in Hebrew (looks like a crowbar), also known as a VAV symbol, is in all space agencies that are 'in' on the occult regime's plan.
I am not simply going to say 'duh, it happened anyway.' I promise you that it's due to this that the intermediary species died out. This supports macroevolution, it's a key ingredient in the theory.
On a scale of 1 - 10 how much reading comprehension must one lack to not see me use sources and even better, not see the definition of 'colonise' in the description explicitly states habitat and human population of the planet?
I do love the stupidity allowed in votes, it makes me fucking laugh.
Yes. What Con could do is say that either Vaping is too harmful physically or it's a worse trade-off as you get the harm anyway but less of the benefit of experience/pleasure/authenticity of real smoking. It lacks the texture, taste etc.
To this, Pro will negate the pleasure of drugs as pointless, subjective nonsense. Then Con can agree with Pro and say that therefore this 'pleasure' angle is worthless, there's no real benefit to vaping whatsoever. Pro will be left with no way out.
It would mean hurting the other line of reasoning (directly opposing it) that Con was using, but doing both at once is better for Con as it hurts Pro worse.
Thanks for the vote :)
I will admit your R4 is badass as fuck, she has a voice in a way I don't usually experience the female vocals.
it is very shocking to me how differently we think of 'feminine music' or what genres please our ears and souls best.
It is time to witness and vote.
You're talking* not You're talk
assassinated* not assinated
Virt was hurt and got Supa murked** maybe, the 'he' is referring to Supa after he hurt Virt and how Supa feels afterwards
Please vote if Rock is to your taste.
This is bullshit, 7 point votebomb is out of order, pls counter it someone
Kritiking is to make it so the debate takes a dynamic that denies the entire 'fight' is supposed to be happening.
To Kritik this topic initially would be to deny that assault rifles are even a correct category to exist (or as they exist, are wrong) in the first place. This means they agree with you that it may be one by name but disagree on the validity of the semantics of 'assault rifle'. Another Kritik would be to challenge you on the AR-15 existing at all (ridiculous as it sounds, I am trying to highlight 2 fundamental ways to Kritik 'this is not that' type of debate resolutions).
On FF and concession they dont remove, ot was agreed shortly after that policy was introduced.
I know this in depth, you are wrong trust me.
The time to vote is here. The time to listen to music has arrived.
please describe why you loved/hated what you did if you can.
Anyone who voted leave genuinely needs a brain scan, in my personal opinion.
"AR-15-style rifles are NOT “assault weapons” or “assault rifles.” An assault rifle is fully automatic, a machine gun. Automatic firearms have been severely restricted from civilian ownership since 1934."
"If someone calls an AR-15-style rifle an “assault weapon,” then they’ve been duped by an agenda. The only real way to define what is an “assault weapon” is politically, as in how any given law chooses to define the term—this is why the states that have banned this category of semiautomatic firearms have done so with very different definitions."
- https://www.nssf.org/msr/
Pls vote if you have time.
Thabks for the vote, I agree ot is on the edge of Rock genre. I dont get the disproportionate 7-poijt vote from the first voter though
Would be interested in your vote here if Rock pleases you at all.
OoDart's debates that are completed, have 2 with forfeits in them.
2 blatant votebombs, just remove it please even if I will lose anyway. Neither user is even eligible to vote.
Thabks for the feedback, I agree with most of it. Rock artists do indeed enunciate words strangely.
You forgot to mention crashing into an ocean, lake etc, it's a devastatingly big consequence of ever risking electric engines.
Thanks for proportionally voting, although I don't understand this round-by-round analysis of what is really a 5 v 5 debate, where quality should be the scaling.
Wtf at my typos... Anyway, congrats on the win Virtuoso. I don't agree with it, nor do I regret in engaging in this. I have learned more about who votes on these and who has what taste. The 'ecosystem' of voters on music has definitely changed, had we had this debate months ago with the same songs, I predict I'd win.
You guys strike me as types who may like Rock.
Disregarding something as rock is up to tje voter, not song poster. Ita obcious you like softer music, he abused the edges of the genre to achieve that. I was apoealing to truer rock fans or people seeking rock in its raw intense form.
Make it explicit that the one who accepts will be for the topic.
Put that you are Con in allcaps in the description outside and inside the debate. Otherwise, voters may side with a noob who falls into the trap.
Perhaps you guys would like this, not sure what your taste is in rock, but I am honestly proud of my selection in this. I loved Rock, had a real emo phase (in my DDO days was still somewhat in the phase), Rock understands anger and sadness like no other genre in my opinion.
I forgot to post the song name for R1, it's Pain by TDG
Amazon URL is wrong too, damn.
can it move into metal and pop? I'm not crystal clear on what is NOT rock in and around the genre.
yes, but you can justify banning him from accepting debates maybe. The latter is up to the mods' discretion, but the voting is always allowed even with blocks.
You are on the green side, which means you are Pro. I understand that you accepted this thinking you are Con to the topic but you're Pro, sorry.
What didn't happen that I said happened?
Now I actually understand the reason behind it, I thought it was because they thought the criminal deserved a bit of pain.
You're welcome.
Just to clear something up, in my RFD I say:
"Even if that is all true, why did Pro not focus very hard on the fact that FS"
I meant 'why did Con'
nice vote modding.
There are three different movie interpretations of it.
How did he prove the need?
how does trent explained how our arguments are tied or how Pro met his BoP at all?
No Ramshutu. You are only the hero in the eyes of fellow villains of this website. One day others will come and see what you are and I am and I promise you, the narrative won't favour you.
You are just out to make me feel bad and bully me. This conversation is over.
Ragnar and Oromagi are guaranteed votes against me in that debate. Much like here, I can objectively annihilate my opponent, turning all their points against themselves even... And the voter will say I didn't touch on the points at all, ignore what I raised and say it wasn't relevant when the very definition of 'colonization' undeniably means that my points were all relevant, brutally so.
In the flat earth being possible debate, they will change the word 'possible' to mean 'probable' just the opposite of what they did to vote against Sparrow in the 'RM can't prove that I am Type1' debates where they allowed your bad faith definitions of 'can' because they sadistically wanted to see him lose and liked the voting-ring corruption you guys got going with each other. I already know how the debate will end. They will vote against me saying it's too ridiculous and improbable what I suggested because the 'reliable scientists' all said so.
You come from the assumption that it's wrong to discredit a group that is entitled to deep government security clearance and never can be truly audited. You speak so fondly of people who have you under their thumb whether or not they are lying, because they can and will control what you do and do not know as they see fit and are legally entitled to do so, including lying.
They can falsify data as they please and the only ones who ever would stop them all serve their agenda. That is why the red 'V' looking symbol, which refers to the number of the beast in Hebrew (looks like a crowbar), also known as a VAV symbol, is in all space agencies that are 'in' on the occult regime's plan.
By faulty voting, indeed.
I am not simply going to say 'duh, it happened anyway.' I promise you that it's due to this that the intermediary species died out. This supports macroevolution, it's a key ingredient in the theory.
On a scale of 1 - 10 how much reading comprehension must one lack to not see me use sources and even better, not see the definition of 'colonise' in the description explicitly states habitat and human population of the planet?
I do love the stupidity allowed in votes, it makes me fucking laugh.
Is it actually due to this that the intermediary species die out, this is actually the very thing needed to debunk creationists.
Yes. What Con could do is say that either Vaping is too harmful physically or it's a worse trade-off as you get the harm anyway but less of the benefit of experience/pleasure/authenticity of real smoking. It lacks the texture, taste etc.
To this, Pro will negate the pleasure of drugs as pointless, subjective nonsense. Then Con can agree with Pro and say that therefore this 'pleasure' angle is worthless, there's no real benefit to vaping whatsoever. Pro will be left with no way out.
It would mean hurting the other line of reasoning (directly opposing it) that Con was using, but doing both at once is better for Con as it hurts Pro worse.