If you mean from me, I figured if someone liked more poppy electronic stuff they'd love it yeah. I had negative feedback in previous battles when I experimented with the poppy stuff but I noticed the elements of electronic music in that song were very good even if you didn't like poppy stuff.
I hate when people say 'not' in the title, take the Con side and actually support the Not meaning they did 2 things to screw up the natural flow of the sides.
Alec I will admit something, you actually have proper skill at debating. This is genuinely artistic right-wing propaganda and I am not even being sarcastic.
RationalMadman avatar
You tried to troll a new user into an unwinnable position. Instead you had a grammatically impossible debate resolution for Pro to uphold.
It will take some time and I will likely fill most of the 30k.
Ramshutu will probably downvote me for 'gish gallop' but I took this because I want to have my teachings found if I were to die and this site is finally becoming googlable.
I will come at you from an angle of moral relativism as opposed to particularism. Meaning I am going to prove there is an absolute polarity to morality in every single person's 'code'. The selfish root of morality will become something I defy particularism with because what I am going to prove is something I realised at around age 13-14; all people are the heroes of their own story, even when they deny it.
It doesn't matter to me. Even if I put in hours of effort to prove it, Ramshutu will get away with wrongly cvbing. To begin with, look at the length of lines and how much internal rhyming he was doing vs you. The entire rap was like you trying to mimic him and got more, not less, so as the rap went on.
you'll probably like these too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDvPGJX-HbE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJOLxSaEffo
I am not interested in your opinion. I'll contact bsh1 and virt directly about it.
Wrong. All votes need to justify why they are tying arguments points, following the change that happened due to my votes that Bsh1 made recently.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/955/vote_links/2250
This and our-boat's current vote award conduct without explaining why they tied arguments.
If you mean from me, I figured if someone liked more poppy electronic stuff they'd love it yeah. I had negative feedback in previous battles when I experimented with the poppy stuff but I noticed the elements of electronic music in that song were very good even if you didn't like poppy stuff.
I hate when people say 'not' in the title, take the Con side and actually support the Not meaning they did 2 things to screw up the natural flow of the sides.
Alec I will admit something, you actually have proper skill at debating. This is genuinely artistic right-wing propaganda and I am not even being sarcastic.
I do not agree with your right wing ideology in real life or online. All users are entitled to fair treatment, whether you brand them 'troll' or not.
Please do not threaten users with mod action like that. Especially not new ones.
Kobe Bryant is.
Con not Pro********
Does this one intrigue you?
Two people I would love to vote against in one troll debate battle.
Will you like to vote?
Please.
RationalMadman avatar
You tried to troll a new user into an unwinnable position. Instead you had a grammatically impossible debate resolution for Pro to uphold.
Con*** not Pro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpMQbHOivY4
Try it.
Thanks :)
I will vote where I please, watch that tone of yours.
I didn't say you suck. Sparrow is one of the best text tap battlers on the Internet. He is the user Type1.
Pink freus voted against the side he meant to vote for.
You votebombed double not against it
How is clear that you won this one
He shouldn't have been president in the fucking first place.
Bsh1 won the debate because this description's rules make it unwinnable for Con.
HAHAHAHAHHAA
I am definitely attracted to women though, just saying. I can't help that I'm a manly straight-leaning bicurious fucker but I was just wired this way.
Well this one time he was correct, I thought this was Hitler vs Stalin. He does have a grudge but it's a lot more to do with him than me.
I still think you didn't do a good alex jones one
OH YEAH this isn't your hitler vs stalin one, that's lame.
Please vote here.
would appreciate a vote from either/both of you a lot.
"It is Con's burden to prove the existence of God."
Autistic people have the lowest crime rate and highest rate of success as detectives of any mind-type on Earth.
What I find interesting is how similar to type1, wrick it's angle was, despite Sparrow being Type1.
Why didn't you vote
type1 playing dirty to 'prove that rating means nothing' tho :)
Type1 revealing himself
Sparrow is Type1 that is all to say.
Shut up
It will take some time and I will likely fill most of the 30k.
Ramshutu will probably downvote me for 'gish gallop' but I took this because I want to have my teachings found if I were to die and this site is finally becoming googlable.
I will come at you from an angle of moral relativism as opposed to particularism. Meaning I am going to prove there is an absolute polarity to morality in every single person's 'code'. The selfish root of morality will become something I defy particularism with because what I am going to prove is something I realised at around age 13-14; all people are the heroes of their own story, even when they deny it.
No. I'm talking in present tense, like 'strike to the jaw' etc. No mistake, couldn't give a fuck what you think of it tbph.
It doesn't matter to me. Even if I put in hours of effort to prove it, Ramshutu will get away with wrongly cvbing. To begin with, look at the length of lines and how much internal rhyming he was doing vs you. The entire rap was like you trying to mimic him and got more, not less, so as the rap went on.
Forth isn't the same word as fourth.
How is mine a vote bomb and the other 2 aren't? LOL!
Are you threatening me with mod action while insulting me?
No it isn't. It says they will be moderated as any other vote would, when against the non-forfeiting side.
I know it is you, not think.
How so? Does he explain anything of my arguments at all?