In my opinion, wrestlers have more flexibility and time to apply techniques in a street fight while also besting their attackers with strength. Strikers as in Kung fu specialists might have a long range advantage of kicking right into oblivion but they've got less time to make that work. In turn, they're mentally challenged to make some quick moves and thus most probably make a mistake on the way. In an ideal scenario of a wrestler vs striker, the wrestler ducks and takes you down even before the kick or the punch comes to play. And then the striker has very less to offer since he's going deep under the pressure on that concrete.
I am with RM on this one. Not because of me belonging to the Muslim community. I am strongly against the terrorist groups in the name of Islam such as ISIS. But in addition to the agenda of framing anti-invasion leaders of Middle East as RM pointed out, I have seen too many falsified and tampered evidences to not condemn US in this case. Also, as he said, it's too easy to DEMONISE Con in this altercation.
Sorry but I kind of conceived the debate that way. Seeing there's no room for deleting my vote, you can report on my vote and probably the moderators will decide what to do about it.
Sorry for not being able to fit in all the references in time. Also, #6 is supposed to be cited for the PPT statement. The cited #6 is supposed to belong to #5. Here are the list of rest of the references-
I love the Good Place reference there. Thanks for putting it up for me to revive my memory of the amazing show.
However, I've always felt the Trolley Problem to be nothing but an unnecessary imposition of stress on an individual. Nothing comes out of it positive. The problem itself is flawed to be asked. To reflect on one's moral dilemma, this in my opinion is a very unsettling situation to engage in.
Are you interested in running it back with a 100-500 character limit setup? The idea is that this one deserved a voting and so we can drop the link there for the voters to judge this while we debate how our stances are justified. So, it may be considered a 6-rounder overall. Voters will judge both debates and vote. Wdys?
This was for me a fruitful interaction thanks to you.
If you want to continue the debate anytime, I'm up for it. Just challenge me in a debate of the same name.
Thanks.
How's the show season by season? Sorry for irrelevant engagement in a debate comment box.
bump please! 3 days to go
Bump bump bump, a week left!
vote bump
Since you seem to have watched the show, wanna cast a vote, please?
In my opinion, wrestlers have more flexibility and time to apply techniques in a street fight while also besting their attackers with strength. Strikers as in Kung fu specialists might have a long range advantage of kicking right into oblivion but they've got less time to make that work. In turn, they're mentally challenged to make some quick moves and thus most probably make a mistake on the way. In an ideal scenario of a wrestler vs striker, the wrestler ducks and takes you down even before the kick or the punch comes to play. And then the striker has very less to offer since he's going deep under the pressure on that concrete.
I am with RM on this one. Not because of me belonging to the Muslim community. I am strongly against the terrorist groups in the name of Islam such as ISIS. But in addition to the agenda of framing anti-invasion leaders of Middle East as RM pointed out, I have seen too many falsified and tampered evidences to not condemn US in this case. Also, as he said, it's too easy to DEMONISE Con in this altercation.
Sorry but I kind of conceived the debate that way. Seeing there's no room for deleting my vote, you can report on my vote and probably the moderators will decide what to do about it.
Sorry for not being able to fit in all the references in time. Also, #6 is supposed to be cited for the PPT statement. The cited #6 is supposed to belong to #5. Here are the list of rest of the references-
6. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=fsq-FJnKSkQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=Pro-poor+Tourism+Strategies:+Making+Tourism+Work+for+the+Poor.+London.+IIED.&ots=p5q6uQG8xy&sig=7beaf9CBUs4AS1pxyGlbHJzg7mw
7. http://wwwshubhyatra.com/maharashtra/slum-tourism.htm/
8. http://www.favelatour.com.br/whatis_ing.htm
9. http://www.ivebeenthere.co.uk/tips/3396
10. http://www.realitytoursandtravel.com/slumtours.html
if it's here after the next two days, I'll take it up
define those terms intelligence_06 asked for. I'll be up for it
Put up the definition for "Think"
sure. I'll just clear out my affairs and look into it soon.
I love the Good Place reference there. Thanks for putting it up for me to revive my memory of the amazing show.
However, I've always felt the Trolley Problem to be nothing but an unnecessary imposition of stress on an individual. Nothing comes out of it positive. The problem itself is flawed to be asked. To reflect on one's moral dilemma, this in my opinion is a very unsettling situation to engage in.
I suspect it's gonna be a nail biting one. Good luck to both
Yeah he's basically debating the UNDEFEATABLE!
welcome to the site! :) you seem to be a decent debater in terms of resourcing and research. Hope to engage with you in a debate sometime.
yeah its an unfortunate one.
Are you interested in running it back with a 100-500 character limit setup? The idea is that this one deserved a voting and so we can drop the link there for the voters to judge this while we debate how our stances are justified. So, it may be considered a 6-rounder overall. Voters will judge both debates and vote. Wdys?
Subscribing to this one.
Close fight. I love such encounters. Good job, both.
It should've continued. Another waste and loss for me as a learner. :'/
BUMP please.
*crisis in space
I sincerely apologize for not being able to fit in the references inside the Round but there was a serious crisis.
If my opponent wishes to, I can wire the sources in his inbox or even in the comment section, np.
was this deliberate or just a waste of a good debate?
Also, Con might challenge a bit of technicalities in the definitions. I'm not gonna point em out tho, for obvious reasons.
I'm looking for those who are skeptic about the art. I know there are many. Let's see if this site has some.
Thanks.
This was for me a fruitful interaction thanks to you.
If you want to continue the debate anytime, I'm up for it. Just challenge me in a debate of the same name.
Thanks.
Tbh, I haven't even gone through that. And I wouldn't do something like that even if I did. Get well soon brother.
Sorry for the delay, I've been engaged in some other works lately.
It should have been at least a 10000 character bracket, too interesting of a topic to leave out words.
And you all are welcome for constructive criticism unless it compromises the spirit of the debate itself.
It'd be great with 10000 characters though. I had to cut through a lot.
Wow I haven't gone on to check out yet. Thanks
Thanks for letting me know, I'll check em out for sure.
OK. No worries.
I believe I should have the edge on better sources as well. And I think that's pretty obvious from the debate.
Am I allowed to state why I decided to report comments?
Sorry, I thought reporting the decision may work out for extending the voting period. I didn't mean to delete it in any way. Hope you understand.
This had to be judged. So unfair I believe after all the works we put in
Why not a vote here?
If you don't wanna go further, please extend to end
I'm actually very new to the platform. Hope you'll keep commenting on the debate in a constructive manner. Thanks