Though, it is certainly true that internet shortages have obstructed my ability to respond. If the internet was never stopped, the response might be submitted earlier and maybe even more elaborate.
Agreed. The system is not perfect and if you leave the page that has not updated for three days, it will show forfeiture. However this is not near as broken as the DDO version.
I am sorry if that came as perceived offensive. It is no one's fault and I deal with it.
speaking of which, I actually think I have the easy win here. Regardless I need to put a lot of effort because a skilled debater can win whatever the hell he wants as long as he is not arguing against pure falsism. This is only near truism and my opponent might still win.
However the description "I will be arguing that Pele is truly the GOAT (serious contenders only/no time wasters)" implies that trolling, kritik and semantical exploits loses credit for conduct.
Evident Sources would most likely work for people who haven't mastered the art of Kritik. People like Oromagi who definitely know how to appropriately manipulate the topic and change the meaning would make the sources on the opposite side unrelated to the present topic. Listing how accomplished Pele is does not make him an animal similar to a sheep. The sources will quickly develop from football games to biological classifications.
So you believe that there is only one proper method of sexual intercourse?
bump
You guys are welcome to vote
bump
Do you mean some americans or all of them>
Though, it is certainly true that internet shortages have obstructed my ability to respond. If the internet was never stopped, the response might be submitted earlier and maybe even more elaborate.
Agreed. The system is not perfect and if you leave the page that has not updated for three days, it will show forfeiture. However this is not near as broken as the DDO version.
Well Oro is known to play semantics, so he probably thinks that a post not in english is one equal of nothing.
Y'all can vote
I thought that was truism
bump
Supposed I am pro, what am I supposed to prove?
define "Uniform design"
I thought you are supposed to prove that people aren't equal
bump
bump
Why is there a vote chain at all?
bump
I'd suggest that your Oromagi style, which had you winning against Fauxlaw, is much more effective.
It is FF.
"Pro's definition says liquid. Pro now wants to change the definition to advance a new argument. No."
The liquid is a state. North Korea is authoritarian, but North Korea is not composed of authoritarianism, it is composed of the people and the land.
You mad lad.
What kind of guy are you? You are voting. If this is just comments or forum posts then I do it, but this is voting.
If I report my own vote, then the mods will not remove it because it is correct.
C'mon, I didn't know there is a vote chain. I just vote for my own opinion and when I found it, it is already too late.
He came from DDO and that is why he uses the description as A1. However it is curious that he did not make any clear arguments.
He is probably waiving.
bump
Bump
What do you mean by "best"?
I am most likely NOT accepting this debate because I am not into children's cartoons, but how to define it?
Mall is an easy target. He never use sources. However No one can sufficiently prove that god exists, and Con has the easy resolution here.
Bump
Oromagi will probably profit upon an FF because his opponent hasn't been online since.
Why don't you debate like Oromagi anymore?
OK, if I used ImaBench's definition for Trolling, then Press trolled by not trolling.
At this point Press is just copy pasting whatever he feels like to as long as it is irrelevant to the debate topic itself.
Define "God".
Define "Existence".
Y'all are welcome to vote.
How about stating that Press's argument will contain at least 3 characters? Your argument is a little too vague.
Seldiora should be elected into the hall of fame if he defeated the undefeatable.
No, I didn't use it in an insulting way. I am genuinely sorry if it came out as offensive but I have no intention of it.
Is it possible to learn this power?
I am sorry if that came as perceived offensive. It is no one's fault and I deal with it.
speaking of which, I actually think I have the easy win here. Regardless I need to put a lot of effort because a skilled debater can win whatever the hell he wants as long as he is not arguing against pure falsism. This is only near truism and my opponent might still win.
No, it is not his fault. I never said that it is his fault. I am just surprised. That's all.
Do you anticipate RM to post anything at all?
This is truism. Logically it is impossible for Con to win.
I am finally ready to change the topic, then an old man just accepts the opposite side to a near-truism?
How is this slippery slope?
However the description "I will be arguing that Pele is truly the GOAT (serious contenders only/no time wasters)" implies that trolling, kritik and semantical exploits loses credit for conduct.
Evident Sources would most likely work for people who haven't mastered the art of Kritik. People like Oromagi who definitely know how to appropriately manipulate the topic and change the meaning would make the sources on the opposite side unrelated to the present topic. Listing how accomplished Pele is does not make him an animal similar to a sheep. The sources will quickly develop from football games to biological classifications.