And also, when you say "PRO is arguing productivity increase, and I did not state anything about that", you are simply saying "I did not read CON's round two."
There are already ways to enusure productivity in business, such as time cards and progress reports
I did not really understand how PRO got the vote for "Better arguments" and "Better sources":
Let me start with "Better sources".
PRO had one round of sources, and I also had one round of sources. PRO unnecessarily blamed me as "not making sense" when it is really his fault. The American standard is a 40 hour work week, and PRO said nothing about changing it to a 32 hour work week in the first round, so it is indirectly said that all existing things would be the same in his argument, or a 40 hour work week. Also, if you are saying the previous sentence is "unjhustified" one could simply say "yeah lets change it so they do not have to go to work." That is what literally PRO is doing in the round two, and is blaming me for his own logical fallacy.
And what do you (fauxlaw) mean "I could not rebut the claim about lost hours?" I clearly stated in round two that it would also impact schools, and employees are paid by the hour, and the business would gradually lose money. In the school area, I clearly told PRO that you can't "skip" school like you can skip a business.
And this assumption was entertained by PRO because he did not say anything about changing it to 32 hour work week and blaming me; you aren't allowed to blame another for the mistakes of your own, so that would count against him for both argument and conduct."
Please take this in consideration for the voting, as I did not really understand how pro got Better arguments and Better sources, and your reasoning says I did not do things I clearly did in my rounds two and three.
I didn't really understand how I lost because i said a human is invincible unless the DNA is changed but I said that in the first round, or the round where I show my statement
Looks like I may have not properly defined "alive"
oops
Also, PRO ditched the sources in the 2nd round.
And also, when you say "PRO is arguing productivity increase, and I did not state anything about that", you are simply saying "I did not read CON's round two."
There are already ways to enusure productivity in business, such as time cards and progress reports
I did not really understand how PRO got the vote for "Better arguments" and "Better sources":
Let me start with "Better sources".
PRO had one round of sources, and I also had one round of sources. PRO unnecessarily blamed me as "not making sense" when it is really his fault. The American standard is a 40 hour work week, and PRO said nothing about changing it to a 32 hour work week in the first round, so it is indirectly said that all existing things would be the same in his argument, or a 40 hour work week. Also, if you are saying the previous sentence is "unjhustified" one could simply say "yeah lets change it so they do not have to go to work." That is what literally PRO is doing in the round two, and is blaming me for his own logical fallacy.
And what do you (fauxlaw) mean "I could not rebut the claim about lost hours?" I clearly stated in round two that it would also impact schools, and employees are paid by the hour, and the business would gradually lose money. In the school area, I clearly told PRO that you can't "skip" school like you can skip a business.
And this assumption was entertained by PRO because he did not say anything about changing it to 32 hour work week and blaming me; you aren't allowed to blame another for the mistakes of your own, so that would count against him for both argument and conduct."
Please take this in consideration for the voting, as I did not really understand how pro got Better arguments and Better sources, and your reasoning says I did not do things I clearly did in my rounds two and three.
BTW thats not what moving the goal post means in round 2.
Hey can you vote for my debate
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2207/weekends-should-be-3-days-long-instead
Lol why is PRO arguing about "oroGAMI" instead of "oroMAGI" and giving examples of "oroMAGI" when the title says "oroGAMI"
Define "best"
That was there already, and failed because everyone wanted to trade things.
hey intelligence_06 do you want to a debate about should colleges use admission tests (SAT and ACT) to decide the admission of people
I'll take yes,
Why full forfeture? Couldn't you just say "I didn't have time, will prepare arg for next round"
Hey sometime later you want to debate (unrated) should colleges use admission tests such as the sat act? I'll take yes.
I didn't really understand how I lost because i said a human is invincible unless the DNA is changed but I said that in the first round, or the round where I show my statement
Thanks for debating with me, though.
Wait whos that lol
Thanks!
Hey intelligence_06, is my argument like how one is supposed to write it? I posted it ~2 min ago.
What's BOP? How do I use it in my debates (also what sources can be used for BOP)
Also i found this (lol meme man)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Wpsc5-jxw
Do I need to have sources? Or are personal examples OK?
So, if a debate is forfeited, will the debate continue as normal or does it have to stop like debate.org
Can you please post your argument for "Weekends should be 3 days long"
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2207/weekends-should-be-3-days-long-instead
Umm... How do I exactly vote?
Well yeah, its pretty much inactive and also nobody votes so its always tie 0=0
Yeah, thats me!
I know who you are, anc2006