Lets say that happens and at the last 5 minutes of the voting period I simply copied RM's vote and fix it. Would it still be a violation even though I copied an improved taken down vote?
What if the voter doesn't decide to improve their vote? So basically I am copying a vote from a vote taken down and that person has no wish to put it back up.
I don't know how you gave sources to the instigator when you said this "but Pro didn't remotely prove anything or give a shred of evidence beyond his own sight."
I wasn't really just making sure you had your title.
"Force. Good or bad?"
I would also like for the 1st Round to be opening arguments and the rest to be whatever the debaters decide.
So basically we both have the maximum amount of Rounds to voice our stances while also not forfeiting the half of Round 1 and half of the last Round which equal to 1 Round with nothing happening.
No it isn't. It is like saying a nuclear bomb ain't because it depends on what you do with it. A bomb is intended to destroy. The force is intended to be something more powerful than current weapons of that present. Fighting fire with a bigger fire is d*mb.
I am guessing you are making a force joke. I have played the video games and watched the movies and still don't understand what you mean. I consider the force to be evil because of the games so guess I am the evil force then.
My DDO record is better than your record here.
Even when we take into account my record here. We both have a 100% win percentage. Just so happens that people like dsjpk5 voted for you because his biases.
>>Does 23-0 ring a bell? Oh right, that was me.
Sad to see on a moderated site you do so poorly. Oh well.
Since you don't understand that I don't want to talk to you because you are child unable to know when you don't know what you are talking about. I will block you. So basically if you reply I won't receive the message so say what you 16.67% win percentage. I don't care and if you do reply it really goes to show how much attention you want. I am willing to end this conversation but you keep replying back as if you are right. You are not and I doubt you even understand that.
>>Yes! Both of our debate styles are subjective opinions. You prove my point. "mine is better" is also an opinion.
So 1+1=2 is a subjective opinion?
Mine is 1 more round than yours. How is mine not better than yours?
>>If your only measure it by most rounds if it went up to 76 rounds max, would you want 76 rounds? "your opinion is worse than my opinion" is a terrible argument. I already explained why.
If? What do you mean if? There are 5 Rounds and I would like to best use those Rounds instead of saying lets forfeit a Round each.
>>This has nothing to do with debate styles. Debate style is simply a preference. That's why you can choose between 2, 3, 4, and 5 rounds.
Mine has more Rounds which means we both have more Rounds to make an argument. This is a better option than yours because yours is one less Round.
>>I gave you 3.
Where? If you were able to point out 3 logical fallacies I committed you would be able to tell me what the logical fallacies I did commit.
>>You are only 3 years older yet still believe you shouldn't have a discourse with opposing opinions.
3 year is a lot and by your worldview which is a Religious conservative I doubt you would improve as much as I have. You don't understand evidence is and don't understand how illogical both conservatism and Religion is.
>>You just think conservatives should get physically assaulted in public for their opinions *subjectively* not being "justified."
Are you telling you can't justify violence when it is conservatives who is stopping public healthcare for everyone and cutting social security for people who need it? Since there live is on the line they are justified with their response because of what conservatives do to them which is not give them public healthcare that allows them to treat their injuries using tax payer money.
>>Shame on you for falling in on the typical left.
>>I prefer 4 rounds because with these types of debates arguments are long and multi-faceted. 3 is too short and 5 is too long. Therefore I like the middle option of 4 rounds.
All this is subjective feelings whereas I provided a better option.
>> If your opinion is different
Yours is opinion mine is not. I am using a standard that makes mine better than yours. It has more than 1 Round. That is more than your style therefore mine is better. This is not my opinion because my style does give both sides another Round.
>> This is a logical conclusion you have yet to address.
What? The logical conclusion is that you understand you are wrong because my standard is better than your opinion.
Don't talk to me because you clearly need a lot more time to develop before you even capable of doing debates. You use opinions over metrics and thing you were the one being logical when you are giving me your opinion. Congrats on being feelings over facts. Knew you were already but guess this just makes sure that you haven't even changed. You even said I committed a logical fallacy but couldn't point to which one I committed.
I repeat don't talk to me. You are a waste of my time.
Don't like it when I am rational so you choose to not answer the question. You don't realise you agreed my style is superior but used your subjective feelings to be against. What does your profile picture say again?
Why don't you understand my debate format is superior to yours and you are wrong? How about that?
>>Virtuoso gropes little boys and is sexually attracted to animals
What does moderation have to do with this?
You are moderating the site. You can't be groping little animals or into bestiality when you are on the site moderating.
Just so you understand that you agree with me but still arguing with me. Let me actually post what you said in response to what I said.
I said: I offer you a better solution and you throw it back at my face and say you do it. You can't see how my way is better so you don't even attempt to understand or even counter to say how it is wrong.
You said in response: All my method does is shrink it by one round. If you are unhappy, then make a debate with your rules and I will accept. Either way will work.
So you basically agree your method is inferior to mine. Yes this isn't a direct saying no I don't agree but you pretty much admit to the pros of my style but you still argue.
I'll stick to the first link you brought up:
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/faith/the-study-of-god/how-do-we-know-the-bible-is-true/is-the-bible-reliable
It states "If, for instance, the Bible is full of historical and factual errors or blatantly contradicts itself, it's hard to trust it or view it as reliable."
"are key in establishing what we know about Jesus including his birth, ministry, teachings, death, resurrection, and more"
Doesn't mean it actually happen. It only states they have dates for supposed occurring.
They said this: "we can compare manuscript copies and fragments with copies we have today and find out if there have been significant changes or if the New Testament we have today is reliable."
And all they came up was this "So when it comes to manuscript evidence, the New Testament definitely has numbers on its side."
Having a lot of something doesn't mean you have compared it. Nor did this site even state that the manuscript was evidence instead accepted it as such.
"claiming that more than 500 people had seen the risen Christ. People who would still have been alive at the time of the writing of 1 Corinthians would have been around to corroborate or criticize the claims made in the letter."
I would have liked to prove that these 500 people were lying or we can even accept 500 people from such a long time ago as a reliable source but they did not.
So basically nothing they have said had anything to do with reliability in terms of the new testament. I don't see the point in talking about the old testament and please don't bring it up and address what I have brought in.
Still have provided a good counter for this. Your version of what is taking place is false because I have already stated why my stance on doing debates is better than yours. Look back and debunk instead of asking me to debunk. You even agree with me.
Your sources did not help your case. They are not credible source by themselves and do not go to other credible sources to say God is real.
>> that showed how the reliability of documents is determined
In order for a source to be reliable it must either be a good source of correct information or it does a good job sourcing their points to reinforce the points they are making. I don't think any of your sources were reliable in respect to God is real.
I did read it because those were bad arguments.
Jesus fulfilling prophecies doesn't make your religion true if one prophecy was that God does exist. Having a lot of copies of something doesn't mean it is reliable.
I know you are a child so I will refrain from child abuse because I know how cranky children get. Come back to me when you know what evidence is, realise Christianity is false and not a conservative. The last 2 are optional. The 1st is a must on top of being logically consistent. If you haven't improved your ways when you turn 18 then I doubt there is really too much to talk to with one another.
I can't talk about the entire show because that would require me to watch the entire Naruto series with Naruto Shippuden. I have never fully watched Shippuden and I think it is longer than Naruto but have watched compilation videos or fight scenes so I don't know the context of every single Shippuden saga to give a statement on its goodness. I am sure it would take me more than 3 days to watch the entire series and I don't want to watch it anyway.
I can't talk about everything about Naruto even with the 30k character limit so I will focus on Naruto which is why I want a repeat of this.
Have the 1st Round be opening arguments and the rest can be rebuttals. We both have the same Rounds to argue and give rebuttals if we both don't rebut in Round 1.
I meant One Punch Man don't know why I am saying One Piece.
I am going for the 3rd option. We will specifically talk about Naruto and you will start. I am not a hypocrite like you so I won't use videos.
>>Already gave evidence in my vote... The mod even repeated it. Stop acting dumb lmfao
Evidence that you were revenge voting? Okay. That is not how you vote on DA.
>>You are bias because you gave the win to the opponent that conceded. No excuse for that. But nevertheless.
I don't see how this is true. It is up to me to decide to made the better argument not who conceded. If I feel the concession was warranted because the other person made the better argument then I will vote for them. Turns out you can't make convincing arguments.
>>Try a very large fan base who has endless love for Naruto, and when it ended it left everyone very emotional. Any anime has rarely done that. It will leave an everlasting imprint.
Id*ots filled with countless personal feelings who do not know what was good for them.
>>The cause of it was because your vote on my debate. Taste of your own medicine.
Tell me how did that work out?
>>I can enforce them.
Like the phony legal papers you had. Okay fraud.
>>So have any of your votes ever gotten deleted before? What about comments? I'll wait.
Yes.
>>Voting for a winner of a debate who conceded the last round isn't judging fairly or properly. Either you truly don't know how to vote or you were just bias against me because of our history and you disliking me.
Forfeiting the last Round does not mean you made the better argument.
>>I don't give a fuck, that's your opinion. It's a joke yet it's better than all of the shows you like, has more sales, it's the 4th best selling manga of all time and is one of the G.O.A.T.s
One of the jokes and you and others have been conned with the joke. Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood, One Piece, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Steins Gate, Samurai Champloo is better than Naruto.
>>You're just mad because Naruto's one of the best of all time
Not by any metric apart from your personal feelings.
>>All you are doing is sparking up drama and I'm not here for it.
Your vote on my debate? Oh wait you are a hypocrite. I knew that already.
>>I told you to not vote/comment/accept any debate page that has me in it. A mod should delete your comment because that's bad conduct but
Making demands that you can't enforce?
>>I bet nothing ever gets done to you because they probably kiss your ass and you get away for everything.
I really kiss ass when I argue with the moderator. Saying that is a testament to how little you know. bsh1 has pretty much never agreed with anything I said.
>>Yet my vote gets revoked and you could probably revenge vote on other people's debates just as you do on DDO and have comments causing drama.
I call it fairly voting on a debate but you can do what you want to suit your narrative.
>>Keep it up and I'll just block you. I hope this site actually does it's job and block people since DDO doesn't.
Your feelings must be hurt that I called something that you like a joke.
>>I knew there were mods on this site and that its more strict over here but I didn't expect my comment to be deleted that quick from a mod, someone must have seen it and told the mod.
So you knew they would take you mod down but still committed to posting the vote. Really goes to show how much you care about me. To come to a different platform just to vote on it just because I was on there. It is sweet but I am not going to share the same kindness. Instead I will fairly judge debates not allow my biases to ruin it. You can't do the same.
Lets say that happens and at the last 5 minutes of the voting period I simply copied RM's vote and fix it. Would it still be a violation even though I copied an improved taken down vote?
What if the voter doesn't decide to improve their vote? So basically I am copying a vote from a vote taken down and that person has no wish to put it back up.
ooof.
I don't know how you gave sources to the instigator when you said this "but Pro didn't remotely prove anything or give a shred of evidence beyond his own sight."
I don't think I will remember by then but if you do bring it up when you are free then I am sure I will be able to take the debate.
I wasn't really just making sure you had your title.
"Force. Good or bad?"
I would also like for the 1st Round to be opening arguments and the rest to be whatever the debaters decide.
So basically we both have the maximum amount of Rounds to voice our stances while also not forfeiting the half of Round 1 and half of the last Round which equal to 1 Round with nothing happening.
I think I would win but what would be your position?
I think I would either take the position that the force does more harm than good or the force is evil.
No it isn't. It is like saying a nuclear bomb ain't because it depends on what you do with it. A bomb is intended to destroy. The force is intended to be something more powerful than current weapons of that present. Fighting fire with a bigger fire is d*mb.
Come back to me when you have a quote of the context and still make the claim that you just did.
Okay. I do that too but only to see how much closer I am to the top.
Thanks.
How did you two find out anyway?
I am guessing I am past him on debate comments but on the forum leaderboard I am still below. Guess I have to start more drama.
I am guessing you are making a force joke. I have played the video games and watched the movies and still don't understand what you mean. I consider the force to be evil because of the games so guess I am the evil force then.
>>You are a trash debater.
My DDO record is better than your record here.
Even when we take into account my record here. We both have a 100% win percentage. Just so happens that people like dsjpk5 voted for you because his biases.
>>Does 23-0 ring a bell? Oh right, that was me.
Sad to see on a moderated site you do so poorly. Oh well.
Since you don't understand that I don't want to talk to you because you are child unable to know when you don't know what you are talking about. I will block you. So basically if you reply I won't receive the message so say what you 16.67% win percentage. I don't care and if you do reply it really goes to show how much attention you want. I am willing to end this conversation but you keep replying back as if you are right. You are not and I doubt you even understand that.
>>Yes! Both of our debate styles are subjective opinions. You prove my point. "mine is better" is also an opinion.
So 1+1=2 is a subjective opinion?
Mine is 1 more round than yours. How is mine not better than yours?
>>If your only measure it by most rounds if it went up to 76 rounds max, would you want 76 rounds? "your opinion is worse than my opinion" is a terrible argument. I already explained why.
If? What do you mean if? There are 5 Rounds and I would like to best use those Rounds instead of saying lets forfeit a Round each.
>>This has nothing to do with debate styles. Debate style is simply a preference. That's why you can choose between 2, 3, 4, and 5 rounds.
Mine has more Rounds which means we both have more Rounds to make an argument. This is a better option than yours because yours is one less Round.
>>I gave you 3.
Where? If you were able to point out 3 logical fallacies I committed you would be able to tell me what the logical fallacies I did commit.
>>You are only 3 years older yet still believe you shouldn't have a discourse with opposing opinions.
3 year is a lot and by your worldview which is a Religious conservative I doubt you would improve as much as I have. You don't understand evidence is and don't understand how illogical both conservatism and Religion is.
>>You just think conservatives should get physically assaulted in public for their opinions *subjectively* not being "justified."
Are you telling you can't justify violence when it is conservatives who is stopping public healthcare for everyone and cutting social security for people who need it? Since there live is on the line they are justified with their response because of what conservatives do to them which is not give them public healthcare that allows them to treat their injuries using tax payer money.
>>Shame on you for falling in on the typical left.
Identity politics everyone. Shame.
What?
Alex Jones vs Bernie Sanders
Looks like both of you are trolling.
>>I prefer 4 rounds because with these types of debates arguments are long and multi-faceted. 3 is too short and 5 is too long. Therefore I like the middle option of 4 rounds.
All this is subjective feelings whereas I provided a better option.
>> If your opinion is different
Yours is opinion mine is not. I am using a standard that makes mine better than yours. It has more than 1 Round. That is more than your style therefore mine is better. This is not my opinion because my style does give both sides another Round.
>> This is a logical conclusion you have yet to address.
What? The logical conclusion is that you understand you are wrong because my standard is better than your opinion.
Don't talk to me because you clearly need a lot more time to develop before you even capable of doing debates. You use opinions over metrics and thing you were the one being logical when you are giving me your opinion. Congrats on being feelings over facts. Knew you were already but guess this just makes sure that you haven't even changed. You even said I committed a logical fallacy but couldn't point to which one I committed.
I repeat don't talk to me. You are a waste of my time.
Don't like it when I am rational so you choose to not answer the question. You don't realise you agreed my style is superior but used your subjective feelings to be against. What does your profile picture say again?
Why don't you understand my debate format is superior to yours and you are wrong? How about that?
Can't you do whatever you said you were going to about this?
https://www.debateart.com/debates/780
Isn't this a call-out debate?
>>Virtuoso gropes little boys and is sexually attracted to animals
What does moderation have to do with this?
You are moderating the site. You can't be groping little animals or into bestiality when you are on the site moderating.
Why isn't this taken down?
Do you have any logical reasoning to combat this, or will you keep pretending you don't see it because you don't like being logically challenged?
Which one since you didn't like the first one I used?
Just so you understand that you agree with me but still arguing with me. Let me actually post what you said in response to what I said.
I said: I offer you a better solution and you throw it back at my face and say you do it. You can't see how my way is better so you don't even attempt to understand or even counter to say how it is wrong.
You said in response: All my method does is shrink it by one round. If you are unhappy, then make a debate with your rules and I will accept. Either way will work.
So you basically agree your method is inferior to mine. Yes this isn't a direct saying no I don't agree but you pretty much admit to the pros of my style but you still argue.
I'll stick to the first link you brought up:
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/faith/the-study-of-god/how-do-we-know-the-bible-is-true/is-the-bible-reliable
It states "If, for instance, the Bible is full of historical and factual errors or blatantly contradicts itself, it's hard to trust it or view it as reliable."
"are key in establishing what we know about Jesus including his birth, ministry, teachings, death, resurrection, and more"
Doesn't mean it actually happen. It only states they have dates for supposed occurring.
They said this: "we can compare manuscript copies and fragments with copies we have today and find out if there have been significant changes or if the New Testament we have today is reliable."
And all they came up was this "So when it comes to manuscript evidence, the New Testament definitely has numbers on its side."
Having a lot of something doesn't mean you have compared it. Nor did this site even state that the manuscript was evidence instead accepted it as such.
"claiming that more than 500 people had seen the risen Christ. People who would still have been alive at the time of the writing of 1 Corinthians would have been around to corroborate or criticize the claims made in the letter."
I would have liked to prove that these 500 people were lying or we can even accept 500 people from such a long time ago as a reliable source but they did not.
So basically nothing they have said had anything to do with reliability in terms of the new testament. I don't see the point in talking about the old testament and please don't bring it up and address what I have brought in.
Did you post a comment?
#68
Still have provided a good counter for this. Your version of what is taking place is false because I have already stated why my stance on doing debates is better than yours. Look back and debunk instead of asking me to debunk. You even agree with me.
#69
If the Bible is reliable then your God is real. Not a point against me and simply read what I said before and add the Bible instead of God.
>> I literally cited the sources
Your sources did not help your case. They are not credible source by themselves and do not go to other credible sources to say God is real.
>> that showed how the reliability of documents is determined
In order for a source to be reliable it must either be a good source of correct information or it does a good job sourcing their points to reinforce the points they are making. I don't think any of your sources were reliable in respect to God is real.
>>I'm an expensive, classy bish, not some cheap-ass street corner hoe."
So pretty much he is still wrong.
I did read it because those were bad arguments.
Jesus fulfilling prophecies doesn't make your religion true if one prophecy was that God does exist. Having a lot of copies of something doesn't mean it is reliable.
???
I know you are a child so I will refrain from child abuse because I know how cranky children get. Come back to me when you know what evidence is, realise Christianity is false and not a conservative. The last 2 are optional. The 1st is a must on top of being logically consistent. If you haven't improved your ways when you turn 18 then I doubt there is really too much to talk to with one another.
Too much hassle so no I don't want to debate.
I can't talk about the entire show because that would require me to watch the entire Naruto series with Naruto Shippuden. I have never fully watched Shippuden and I think it is longer than Naruto but have watched compilation videos or fight scenes so I don't know the context of every single Shippuden saga to give a statement on its goodness. I am sure it would take me more than 3 days to watch the entire series and I don't want to watch it anyway.
It is a continuation of this:
https://www.debate.org/debates/Naruto-Is-Not-Gifted-Or-Privileged.-He-Has-Worked-For-Everything-Hes-Got./1/
I can't talk about everything about Naruto even with the 30k character limit so I will focus on Naruto which is why I want a repeat of this.
Have the 1st Round be opening arguments and the rest can be rebuttals. We both have the same Rounds to argue and give rebuttals if we both don't rebut in Round 1.
If it isn't clear. It would be a copy with improvements if necessary to this debate:
https://www.debate.org/debates/Naruto-Is-Not-Gifted-Or-Privileged.-He-Has-Worked-For-Everything-Hes-Got./1/
No. I would be wasting a Round so that you can start.
If you make the debate you start.
Green is Pro. Red is Con.
I meant 4th option.
I meant One Punch Man don't know why I am saying One Piece.
I am going for the 3rd option. We will specifically talk about Naruto and you will start. I am not a hypocrite like you so I won't use videos.
Am I supposed to respond to your feelings?
How about this. I challenge you to a debate about Naruto.
>>Already gave evidence in my vote... The mod even repeated it. Stop acting dumb lmfao
Evidence that you were revenge voting? Okay. That is not how you vote on DA.
>>You are bias because you gave the win to the opponent that conceded. No excuse for that. But nevertheless.
I don't see how this is true. It is up to me to decide to made the better argument not who conceded. If I feel the concession was warranted because the other person made the better argument then I will vote for them. Turns out you can't make convincing arguments.
>>Try a very large fan base who has endless love for Naruto, and when it ended it left everyone very emotional. Any anime has rarely done that. It will leave an everlasting imprint.
Id*ots filled with countless personal feelings who do not know what was good for them.
>>The cause of it was because your vote on my debate. Taste of your own medicine.
Tell me how did that work out?
>>I can enforce them.
Like the phony legal papers you had. Okay fraud.
>>So have any of your votes ever gotten deleted before? What about comments? I'll wait.
Yes.
>>Voting for a winner of a debate who conceded the last round isn't judging fairly or properly. Either you truly don't know how to vote or you were just bias against me because of our history and you disliking me.
Forfeiting the last Round does not mean you made the better argument.
>>I don't give a fuck, that's your opinion. It's a joke yet it's better than all of the shows you like, has more sales, it's the 4th best selling manga of all time and is one of the G.O.A.T.s
One of the jokes and you and others have been conned with the joke. Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood, One Piece, Neon Genesis Evangelion, Steins Gate, Samurai Champloo is better than Naruto.
>>so I voted inaccurately just as you did. You did use bias.
No evidence given.
>>Only reason I voted on here because of your vote against me.
If me voting against you means I am biased then you are wrong. You can be wrong on every issue and I voted fairly against you without being biased.
Name one logical fallacy I committed.
>>You're just mad because Naruto's one of the best of all time
Not by any metric apart from your personal feelings.
>>All you are doing is sparking up drama and I'm not here for it.
Your vote on my debate? Oh wait you are a hypocrite. I knew that already.
>>I told you to not vote/comment/accept any debate page that has me in it. A mod should delete your comment because that's bad conduct but
Making demands that you can't enforce?
>>I bet nothing ever gets done to you because they probably kiss your ass and you get away for everything.
I really kiss ass when I argue with the moderator. Saying that is a testament to how little you know. bsh1 has pretty much never agreed with anything I said.
>>Yet my vote gets revoked and you could probably revenge vote on other people's debates just as you do on DDO and have comments causing drama.
I call it fairly voting on a debate but you can do what you want to suit your narrative.
>>Keep it up and I'll just block you. I hope this site actually does it's job and block people since DDO doesn't.
Your feelings must be hurt that I called something that you like a joke.
>>I knew there were mods on this site and that its more strict over here but I didn't expect my comment to be deleted that quick from a mod, someone must have seen it and told the mod.
So you knew they would take you mod down but still committed to posting the vote. Really goes to show how much you care about me. To come to a different platform just to vote on it just because I was on there. It is sweet but I am not going to share the same kindness. Instead I will fairly judge debates not allow my biases to ruin it. You can't do the same.
Yes I do.
You accepted it before I did. Damn it.
Naruto is a joke.