How about we define the "Status Quo" as the immigration quota in the US as of the end of September 2023 (ignoring changes since then)? You would argue we should keep or decrease that quota, I argue we increase it.
That's advice for the first round of the debate, not a site rule that overrides the description of the debate. Favorable definitions are allowed. That said, pretty much anything can be kritiked, but voters are likely to default to the rules and definitions set in the description.
See “absurd special rules”:
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
No I mean the account has to be x number of days old to have access to voting, not the age of the user. That allows mods to remove voted privileges from suspected vote bomb accounts before they can act.
I know mods can suspend voting privileges on certain accounts—is it possible to make account age a requirement for voting, or is that up to the site owner?
Voting will end Sept. 4 at 1:33PM. We will need to be vigilant about new accounts appearing just before then. Very difficult for a new account to show up and do three troll debates in only a few seconds, so that should serve as insurance.
Akrasia has a point that the vote deserves a second look; I think it is probably insufficient due to the attribution error. That said, I definitely don't think this was intentional on Greyparrot's part, and excellent sportsmanship on Con's part for pointing that out.
Tagging Greyparrot in case I'm misinterpreting this.
Regardless of how complex the criteria are, someone will be able to get past it. And some debates get zero votes, so we'd be making that problem worse.
Might be better to just give a 24-hour window after voting concludes for mods to remove troll votes. Right now anyone can vote 2 minutes before the deadline and swing the outcome with no recourse.
Thanks for voting!
5 days left! All votes are appreciated.
Bump
Plz vote if you get the chance!
Nonetheless, I will give you the topic so you can start in the first round...
"THBT: On balance, the majority of Light Yagami's killings in Death Note were unjustified."
Best.Korea is PRO. I am CON.
I assume you are arguing as Pro and I am arguing as Con for whatever resolution I pick?
Thanks for voting!
Bump
Thanks
Please vote if you get the chance!
Australia?
Done!
Done. Although I think they mean effectively the same thing in this context.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/immigrate
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emigrate
In which sentence? Emigrants allowed into America? Or emigrants allowed to leave America?
Yes, just the amount. I'm arguing that we raise the quota (let in more immigrants); you argue for the status quo.
Otherwise, if you want, we can use a different definition.
How about we define the "Status Quo" as the immigration quota in the US as of the end of September 2023 (ignoring changes since then)? You would argue we should keep or decrease that quota, I argue we increase it.
Lmk if this format works for you
Humans are carbon-based lifeforms
Taxes paid by humans = carbon tax
Well, it's Best.Korea. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually meant genocide.
That's advice for the first round of the debate, not a site rule that overrides the description of the debate. Favorable definitions are allowed. That said, pretty much anything can be kritiked, but voters are likely to default to the rules and definitions set in the description.
See “absurd special rules”:
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
Kicking a pregnant woman is a crime.
You'd be best off defining murder in the description and holding both parties to that definition. Otherwise Con is likely to use legal definitions.
Every *single* mathematician
With a *bachelor's* degree
I see what you did there.
Thanks for the vote!
Forgot to say this earlier: welcome back!
Thanks for voting!
Thanks for voting!
Thanks! I know it's a long one.
Plz vote! Only a few days left.
5 days left to vote!
No I mean the account has to be x number of days old to have access to voting, not the age of the user. That allows mods to remove voted privileges from suspected vote bomb accounts before they can act.
I know mods can suspend voting privileges on certain accounts—is it possible to make account age a requirement for voting, or is that up to the site owner?
Voting will end Sept. 4 at 1:33PM. We will need to be vigilant about new accounts appearing just before then. Very difficult for a new account to show up and do three troll debates in only a few seconds, so that should serve as insurance.
Plz award all points to CON! Free credits for standing up to vote bombers.
whiteflame knows about my alt already. I promise this is not a trap, and if it is, the mods can ban me.
Since you're Con, I would change the resolution to "Transgenderism is correct" for clarity.
Plz vote if you get the chance!
Thanks whiteflame! Also thanks to SkepticalOne for the debate.
Plz vote if you get the chance!
Akrasia has a point that the vote deserves a second look; I think it is probably insufficient due to the attribution error. That said, I definitely don't think this was intentional on Greyparrot's part, and excellent sportsmanship on Con's part for pointing that out.
Tagging Greyparrot in case I'm misinterpreting this.
US does not stand for democracy
It stands for "United States"
Regardless of how complex the criteria are, someone will be able to get past it. And some debates get zero votes, so we'd be making that problem worse.
Might be better to just give a 24-hour window after voting concludes for mods to remove troll votes. Right now anyone can vote 2 minutes before the deadline and swing the outcome with no recourse.
They did troll debates against each other, but those have since been deleted.
"Con won this by a large margin"
*proceeds to vote for Pro*
Well I gave my vote, for better or for worse.
That's right, I almost forgot. Thanks for voting, and thanks to SL for an engaging debate.
I want to see a no-holds-barred battle where RM raps as SL and SL raps as RM. Would be interesting.
Typo for the modus ponens about the forest. P2 should read: "Abortion involves making someone dependent on oneself and then removing bodily support."
Well, true