If it is a bonus round, do you randomize who gets what side?
Are we supposed to argue these resolutions as written or are we to change them like what happened here?
I don't understand how to argue a resolution that ends up not being the resolution that is judged.
I have said many a time that the rhythm you have in your head is not clear based on how it is written. The inflexion, and cadence etc. So while something may not read like it has good rhymes, it may sound better if spoken with the style you are looking for. You admitted just as such yourself.
I dont know why you keep badgering me about it. This is the reason I said I would not vote rap debates anymore.
i will not emgage with people who are abusive. Feel free to apologize. I will ote that you cpuld have aet the BoP you could have called put the shift
You did not. And while Con did not argue for an all meat diet he did make it clear that meat is healthy and we are not deaigned for all plant.
You failing to nail his goal ppst os an aqiiesence. His better sources are a you problem not me. If you dont like the vote and think it breached the CoD then repoet it.
It is very disrespectful foe ypu to argue with .me after i gave the time to read and opine. Con knows i am one of the most neutral voters here. Ypu had all the chance to win. Con showed all things ben g equal eating meat is better.
reread my RFD you did not protest it properly. It was your debate to win and you did not take the chances. Con argued and obfuscated enpugh with better sources. Clear win in my humble opinion.
I could not disagree more. An 9bvious secondary favr that is deduced from an experiment is not ignored
Many studies gave a hypothesis and the results do not align. Rather does not mean ypu ignore them. In fa t from a bias perspective those results are more trustworthy.
Check the Stanford Prison Experiment as an unexpected result that shocked the psychological world. You are just flat out wrong
A car is tested for fuel efficiency. That is the purpose. Yes uou discover the car catches on fire 4 times out of ten at 6k rpm. The study purpose may be A however the data also shows B
The second point was not addressed, however, I clearly rebutted both the first and third point, I even have headings. Oh well. Thank you for your time on it. I appreciate that.
Thank you for the vote. I am confused why Pro gets credit for the win without addressing any of my arguments. However a vote it a vote, and I thank you for taking the time to read it and comment.
I wasn't trying to call you out. I had to justify why I was giving SL a full 7 points. RM had better lyrics. And SL even warned in Round 4 that RM would have a problem with a negative vote. It was nothing on you, it was me trying to over-justify my vote. SL was correct. RM was not happy. Being judged is difficult. Judging is also difficult. I am sorry if you felt I called you out.
Clearly, I have upset one of the participants in this debate. I would appreciate some voting attention to this debate so that any error I made would be statistically rendered moot. And if not, I am happy that my interpretation is defendable.
There is a process to report votes that you think are not consistent with the Voting Policy. The rubric set was 1-4. There are only two people. So I can only compare them against each other. One or the other would get 4. I do feel bad that you do not like other people's genuine opinions.
Don't worry my friend. Others will either agree or disagree and you will be vindicated. I stated my opinion, and I justified it. It is not my fault the others who gave votes could not read the instructions. You will note one thing about me and that is I don't get into fights. As I said on a few of yours, you have great creativity and linguistic ability. It's just too complex to assemble in reading form, and I have said before that I have to reread your lines to try to make them make sense. That has no flow. That has no cadence. That is forcing me to try to make it work.
When you have to break the battle off to explain what you are doing, you lose all flow. Seriously, you stopped your battle to try to explain yourself. The rhymes are connected with flow, and a poor flow, with poor timing, that you yourself agreed to, results in a poor cadence. You did dominate with lyrics.
A quick vote on this would be appreciated. https://www.debateart.com/debates/4674-discussing-race-based-genetic-differences-is-a-significant-contributor-to-racism-and-is-therefore-unacceptable
Thank you for the kind words. I also appreciate your openess to others skills and abilities. Debates would be more fruitfull if that theme pulsed through the ego stretched veins of participants.
Arguments: Better lyricism, including quality of comebacks and metaphors
Sources: Better flow
Spelling & Grammar: Better disses
Conduct: Which opponent was more creative
I will vote the above way you like. I have read it twice there is some quality on both sides. Winner is very clear to me.
FishChaser. Per the voting guidelines, you need to be more detailed about the reasons for your vote. I have flagged the vote, not because it was against me, but because it is not consistent with the voting practices here.
You can vote however you want, provided it is defendable. I have made a few mistakes voting, and I have been rightfully corrected.
Thanks for the vote and taking the time to read the content. Some interesting points, and I must admit I did not take this debate seriously because of the way the resolution was written.
(a) a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,
(i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity, or.....
I forfeit. Please round up the votes to take this.
I forfeit. Please round up the votes to take this.
I forfeit. Please round up the votes to take this.
I FORFEIT
If it is a bonus round, do you randomize who gets what side?
Are we supposed to argue these resolutions as written or are we to change them like what happened here?
I don't understand how to argue a resolution that ends up not being the resolution that is judged.
The last thing to worry about is this silly shit. You take care of yourself. I am sending you good vibes and positive energy. Be well.
I have said many a time that the rhythm you have in your head is not clear based on how it is written. The inflexion, and cadence etc. So while something may not read like it has good rhymes, it may sound better if spoken with the style you are looking for. You admitted just as such yourself.
I dont know why you keep badgering me about it. This is the reason I said I would not vote rap debates anymore.
Can you vote please.
i will not emgage with people who are abusive. Feel free to apologize. I will ote that you cpuld have aet the BoP you could have called put the shift
You did not. And while Con did not argue for an all meat diet he did make it clear that meat is healthy and we are not deaigned for all plant.
You failing to nail his goal ppst os an aqiiesence. His better sources are a you problem not me. If you dont like the vote and think it breached the CoD then repoet it.
It is very disrespectful foe ypu to argue with .me after i gave the time to read and opine. Con knows i am one of the most neutral voters here. Ypu had all the chance to win. Con showed all things ben g equal eating meat is better.
reread my RFD you did not protest it properly. It was your debate to win and you did not take the chances. Con argued and obfuscated enpugh with better sources. Clear win in my humble opinion.
i will get to it.
Judges have at it!!! Thank ypu Sir Lancelit for setting this up and Jamgiler.. everything said is in good fun and competative spirit.
I could not disagree more. An 9bvious secondary favr that is deduced from an experiment is not ignored
Many studies gave a hypothesis and the results do not align. Rather does not mean ypu ignore them. In fa t from a bias perspective those results are more trustworthy.
Check the Stanford Prison Experiment as an unexpected result that shocked the psychological world. You are just flat out wrong
A car is tested for fuel efficiency. That is the purpose. Yes uou discover the car catches on fire 4 times out of ten at 6k rpm. The study purpose may be A however the data also shows B
Thank you for the invite. I will not be voting on any of your rap battles. I clearly don't know enough. Best of luck with it!
The second point was not addressed, however, I clearly rebutted both the first and third point, I even have headings. Oh well. Thank you for your time on it. I appreciate that.
Thank you for the vote. I am confused why Pro gets credit for the win without addressing any of my arguments. However a vote it a vote, and I thank you for taking the time to read it and comment.
Thank yyou or the vote.
I wasn't trying to call you out. I had to justify why I was giving SL a full 7 points. RM had better lyrics. And SL even warned in Round 4 that RM would have a problem with a negative vote. It was nothing on you, it was me trying to over-justify my vote. SL was correct. RM was not happy. Being judged is difficult. Judging is also difficult. I am sorry if you felt I called you out.
Clearly, I have upset one of the participants in this debate. I would appreciate some voting attention to this debate so that any error I made would be statistically rendered moot. And if not, I am happy that my interpretation is defendable.
RM, This is all I can do.
There is a process to report votes that you think are not consistent with the Voting Policy. The rubric set was 1-4. There are only two people. So I can only compare them against each other. One or the other would get 4. I do feel bad that you do not like other people's genuine opinions.
Don't worry my friend. Others will either agree or disagree and you will be vindicated. I stated my opinion, and I justified it. It is not my fault the others who gave votes could not read the instructions. You will note one thing about me and that is I don't get into fights. As I said on a few of yours, you have great creativity and linguistic ability. It's just too complex to assemble in reading form, and I have said before that I have to reread your lines to try to make them make sense. That has no flow. That has no cadence. That is forcing me to try to make it work.
When you have to break the battle off to explain what you are doing, you lose all flow. Seriously, you stopped your battle to try to explain yourself. The rhymes are connected with flow, and a poor flow, with poor timing, that you yourself agreed to, results in a poor cadence. You did dominate with lyrics.
Votes are votes.
My pleasure.
A quick vote on this would be appreciated. https://www.debateart.com/debates/4674-discussing-race-based-genetic-differences-is-a-significant-contributor-to-racism-and-is-therefore-unacceptable
Thank you for the vote.
fair point. Let us say acceptable in our current Western social model
I agree. Well articulated, and well presented first round... Time shall tell :)
Thank you for the kind words. I also appreciate your openess to others skills and abilities. Debates would be more fruitfull if that theme pulsed through the ego stretched veins of participants.
I will get to it for sure. I have a few open debates needing votes as well. Rationing Consumables, and Barney is the Devil are two of them :)
Arguments: Better lyricism, including quality of comebacks and metaphors
Sources: Better flow
Spelling & Grammar: Better disses
Conduct: Which opponent was more creative
I will vote the above way you like. I have read it twice there is some quality on both sides. Winner is very clear to me.
Great moderating on all fronts. Thank you Barney
I am removing myself as a potential judge for this debate.
Of course
I can judge if you are selecting judges
Thank you for the votes, and for taking the time to read and comment on the content!
FishChaser. Per the voting guidelines, you need to be more detailed about the reasons for your vote. I have flagged the vote, not because it was against me, but because it is not consistent with the voting practices here.
You can vote however you want, provided it is defendable. I have made a few mistakes voting, and I have been rightfully corrected.
Thanks for the vote and taking the time to read the content. Some interesting points, and I must admit I did not take this debate seriously because of the way the resolution was written.
Sure. I think we are on the same side of a few fences. Lets message and see what we can come up with.
I would be interested in your thoughts on this.
All good mate. Lets have a good one. I like your formatting in some of your other debates.
Not everywhere. In the EU
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2020-003718_EN.html
In Canada....
(a) a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,
(i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity, or.....
Ok, I accept that. Care to reword it? If peace can occur without violence then why is it necessary in Christianity?
If Loli porn is legal, does that mean that sexdolls depicted to represent children should also be legal?
Do these troll debates for permissions defeat the purpose?
I accept the disclaimed use of ChatGPT in Con's About Me.
In reality those photos are not brides.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hamas-wedding-girls/
You are not helping the argument when you are posting propaganda.
Can you start a debate, for me only with this resolution
"Violence is always necessary for peace. For Slainte only."
You are Pro, I am Con, 3 rounds, 10k character limit.
How can you have peace with violence?
If everyone behaves as a Christian, then why would anyone need to keep the peace?