Vader

FF................

RM: 205/240
WF: 203/240
Full RFD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zgvaBkZX6IIS63zVIwm-inmPKYqtJzlU-EaIsoN0KCw/edit?usp=sharing
Favorite RM AMV: Weathering With You AMV
Favorite WF AMV: O z (FMAB AMV)

Comments: Grading AMV's is very subjective to what a person likes and such. Thus this was a tough battle to judge overall. It came down to the wire near the end. Needless to say, there was great AMV's on both sides

(NOTE, since this isn't a winner selection, I am going to score this debate for full points to winner.)
==================
Final Score
Croc: 68.4/90
Gugigor: 70.5/90

Short Summary: Gugigor took a lot more risks than Croc did, and I think Croc could’ve won if he switched his 2nd song at number two. This was really close and there were a lot of great options. Ultimately this was my taste in music, so someone else's could be different, but this is my opinion

====================
For the full RFD, please refer to the google doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RYR0veJ9_bVZIbugl8to-KCV6-uYtpzaEaLeRgzPcgU/edit?usp=sharing

He didn't use the letter E

Concession

Concession

FF

I like music

Concession

(update I realized it's 250 for gold and not 100)

FULL RFD: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NIydr5W-q5U_2v1jBWeHK-HEHMqoEvqVAQC8dtgiGKs/edit?usp=sharing

Very close debate, but I think the Resolution isn't dismantled, but is disproven by CON

Full Forefeit. More votes lol

FF

Gimme them medals

Concession...therefore CON wins

Also giving conduct to CON due to the attempt to reject, which is good conduct

FULL FOREFEIT

75% FF, hence

Case is preffered to CON and is extended and refuted, giving the advantage to CON

FF

Now this is a story how my life got flipped turn upside down

Willing concession

Full Forefeit. Always working to get them votes in for debates

Concession

Pro gives very little evidence not listening evidence and personally attacking using an ad hominem in his attacks overall. Con respectfully refutes with evidence and I give advantage to the CON

As a Chicagoan, I am very passionate on Hot Dogs and Pizza

Pro source outweighs CON because it is a direct refute to the point, while CON's is talking about influence, which does not mean anything due to the fact that the source is invalid it is called divisive, therefore that source is turned and CON gets point.

CON does not deep enough into his source and instead really just says, look at it. CON's point that Tomato is in the Pizza outweighs since a contrasting flavor overall in Pizza can be acceptable, as it used in Pizza. I feel as if the BoP by CON is never contested enough by PRO in the case and does not go after the points enough. I think the Pineapple as a waste of sources is a weak argument overall, so I don't evaluate any sides. I think the BoP is better defended by CON, so I will give args to CON

PRO ignores the K made in this debate leaving it uncontested, therefore making it uncontested and CON wins

FF is bad conduct

Full forefeit

CON FF less but put less quality into the posts, so I don't rule for either side, and it is a tie

Concession means forefeiture of arguments voiding the debate, therefore making PRO the winner

False facts overall by CON in R1 plus FF leads me to give full points to CON

50% forefeit is lazy and bad conduct overall in the debate, and therefore the arguments con and conduct con

Creationism was refuted in a manner that was not sufficent to the argument made by CON in this. The arguments go uncontested in the case where there is evidence. A misinterpretation gets refuted by the PRO and extended by PRO to point out fallacies, and with R3 closing the deal, PRO wins

I love free votes bc of FF

I like the Greek dynamicsquid orea einai anyway ff

Case was really weak, but FF in the debate was bad conduct, therefore Pro wins

RM forefeited less so RM gets the conduct vote

Forefeiture by PRO means CON case is turned
Sources v NO Sources goes CON

Lost by huge ass RFD on who wins this rap battle and basically I am legit PO'ed, so I will give cliffnotes on who wins

My score is given based on average quality raps of each verse, not round by round winner. IF RM gets a 10,9,5 and armouredcat gets 9,8,9, armoured is the better rapper. Let's just jump into this and my decisions. I will give the tally first and who wins based off my calculations. If you want me to reference specific lines which stood out, comment me below. I had it all layed out, and well, fuck me...

R1 armoured: 8.8/10
R1 RM: 9/10

R2: armoured: 8.7/10
R2 RM: 9/10

R3 armoured: 9/10
R3 RM: 8.7/10

26.7/30=RM
26.6/30= armouredcat

I had this as a draw for the most part, but then I graded effort/quality of the rap and decided based on that, since it seems unfair to give this a tie when deciding, but this was a tough ballot to cast

R1 Comments
---------------------
armouredcats flow was insanely good and did a good enough job to do well. Good puns all in all and clever word play. RM has superb wordplay and puns in this overall, and I do enjoy his cat puns that are relevant. I prefer relevant puns that go sharp in the heart, like how I take on RM in these battles. You needed sharper cuts versus a couple of dull blades. I think RM takes it, cutting a bit deeper

R2 Comments
---------------------
I graded effort here too. Armoured seemed to have less effort than RM, which I get, but I ended up taking a small deduction off from the original score, which could have been way better. I think the flow was neater, but the disses again were weak as hell, but superb wordplay. RM has superb wordplay and superb DISSES and these are some of his most lethal disses he has dropped in the game, and he goes insane. His flow is not even bad. RM dominants, but armoured is tough

R3 Comments
---------------------
Armoured's was good, again, great flow, but the wordplay was lacking, but better sharper disses. RM really did not put too much effort. Ehh flow again but superb disses again. His wordplay was unimaginably good too.

in conclusion, both rappers were insanely good, but RM mildly pulls away, I would score a draw, but don't wanna be a KSI v Logan I

PRO did not ever make an argument... CON died. Bad conduct in FF

oh wylted, FF is bad

RM surrendered

I also need to do votes so yay

ARGS to CON: I think the case is pretty strong for PRO in this debate and I think he makes a good point, but the refute by CON is masterly done and treated. I think CON takes arguments in the rebuttals. There was no BoP to go by in R1 other than, all animals are equal. The CON debater refutes this well enough. The R2 rebuttals by PRO were extremely weak given this was a 2 round debate, and I think there needed to be more contestion with the CON argument itself. I think CON wins.

SOURCE to CON: Con used no sources in R2 and I think that is bad policy for a rebutal. PRO used sources that contested the point at hand. It does come down to the sense that the sources were apparent and out valued PRO's 3 sources used in the debate.

Everything else was tie. Nothing was either in bad conduct and no glaring S&G issues

Good debate

I'll grade by this
ARGS: Morality/Puns
SOURCE: Rhymes
S&G: Flow/Scheme
CONDUCT: general conduct

FIRST 3 WILL GRADE ROUND BY ROUND, will be giving a 10 pt scale based of the content
---------------
R1 AD
ARGS: 8. I like the theme here. Generic and basic, but it is still a good theme to talk with a edgy twist to it, it works here and i like it overall
SOURCE: 3. Yes, it is a freestyle, but I need better rhymes. Some words did not rhyme, like nuts and choc-lates. need to improve
SG: 5. Choppy flow but good flow at some points. Could be improved, but not the costliest thing
16/30 R1

R1 WP
ARGS: 6. It was too short for as a counter. It needed more to it and I think there was. Great premise and some great deep rhetoric, but I needed some more beef to a rebuttal
SOURCE: 6. An attempt to rhyme was made here. It was one syllable words, but basic enough to get decent points
SG: 5. It is hard to award more than 5 to that. The flow was beautiful, but anyone could make an amazing to flow stanza
17/30 R1

--------
R2 AD

ARGS: 9. Another deep and creative verse for theming here. I LOVE THE PUNS MADE HERE TOO AND THE REFRENCES. Extremely clever
SOURCE: 7.5. Multisylabic rhymes are key here and this flow takes the cake. Since it is a freestyle, I give more attempt to credit the inner verse rhymes, but more di/trisylabic rhymes would be amazing
SG: 6. Flow is still choppy, but it is slightly better with good flowing ones. Again, I can't see myself awarding more than 6 for 2 line bars
22.5/30

R2 WP

ARGS: 2. Yawwwnnnn. Boring. Not enough puns, too much of a basic top about family, just plain boring
SOURCE: 6. One syllable boring rhymes again, cmon now
SG: 6. I can't give more than a 7 for the flow here, but it was very good.
14/30

-------
R3 AD

ARGS: 1. Disorganized, broad topic, and hard for me to focus on a central theme. No real clever pun and wordplay in here that catches my eye, and is just a WTF momet
SOURCE: 8. Great rhyming again with good rhetoric and great rhyming words. That was pretty good again. I liked the rhymes
SG: 7. great overall flow, but its 2 line stanzas, can't give more than a 7 here, but if more lines were done, this would have been a 10
16/30

R3 WP
ARGS: 6. The clapback is nice, its sassy and classy. I like it. I wish you could have done more with it but, oh well.
SOURCE: 6. Ehhh, ehhh, ehhh. I'll give it a 6. It had some attempt at complex rhyming words, but it doesn't go deep
SG. 5 Nothing special at all really, it was just average at best... i didn't find it thrilling, nor detrimental
17/30

---------------
R4 AD:
ARGS: 7. Emotions getting repetitive now. I like how u go Drake feelings, but you need to go deeper. I love the wordplay, and that is your score saver
SOURCE:. 4. NO NO NO, that is not good. 2 lines did not rhyme and the rhyme scheming did not match
SG: 4. NO NO. STOP THE CHOPPY FLOWS. IT IS NOT GOOD, NO NO NO
15/30

R4: WP
ARGS. 0. Now it is a copy pasta turned positive with no originality to it. Yea I am not a fan
SOURCE: 6. An attempt at rhyme scheming is made, but it is ok
SG: 4. I do not like it's quick burst to slow burst feel. I just don't at all, it is confusing nonsense
10/30
--------------
R5. Concession. So giving conduct to PRO

VERDICT

ARGS: AD
SOURCE: AD
SG: TIE
CONDUCT: AD

WINNER: AvoidDeath. May leave a few comments so check for reply

CON turns PRO sources in favor of him, using his arguments against him. This is an argument turn, which is where the argument are structured to favor the opposing debater vs the debater siting. Club points it out in R3, and therefore, he gets credibility for most arguments and sources. This means the argument are based off no source claims by PRO, therefore the claims with evidence by CON outweigh any of PRO claims.

theres charlie in the trees

The total score of each song out of 10 will determine the winner

OMAR
R1: Catchy song. Not that bad and overall a good in game sound track when completing a level. Fast pace, nice instrumental. I think gets a bit repetitive some points,
[7]

R2: I don't like it. I think it relies too heavily on the vocals of the song and the beat defeats the purpose on the song. The presentation of the lyrics make it clustered and overall an ehhh type of song.
[4]

R3: I like its Pomp and Circumstance feel to it with a lift up melody to it. I think it is less repetitive than R1, but still the same repetition of each. While it is easier to listen to if it gets repetitive, it will lose only some points. It is a close 9, but just not there yet
[8]

R4: This SONG HAD SO MUCH POTENTIAL! The beat itself was a 10 but the lyrics...ugh...the vocals...what the fuck. It didn't seem in harmony and overall lacked the umph of the beat. This could have been a 10 with better vocals
[7]

R5: This to me is the definition of an average song fmpov. Its beat is nothing special but not awful, and the vocals themselves are not bad either. It is just a definition of average. Nothing stands out about the song
[5]

Total: 31/50
-----------------------
AVERAGE12

R1: Way to much organ with random cutting sounds in between. It starts to get really annoying after listening to it due to its repetitive nature. It loses a lot of points for that and to me just sounds hard to listen to
[4]

R2: It is still mildly repetitive and could get annoying after a while, but overall it is not that bad of a song. I like the electric feel to it overall and to is above average to good. It is sitting between a 6 and a 7, but I will go with a 7 because it was a good song
[7]

R3: My favorite track all time on this debate. I love its instrumental and never gets old to listen too. It still is a great listen despite it being 6 minutes but it does not get old and is great. If I bop my head to it, it gets a 10 and in my eyes, this is a 10
[10]

R4: I love the remixes of these songs and they are amazing. The original song is soooo good. I wish it was a bit longer but it is still amazing and is sooo catchy. I love this song and enjoy it so much
[9]

R5: It is really too inconsistent for me to give it a solid grade overall. The instrumentals are very good, but it's inconsistency makes it harder to enjoy the song when you can't follow along with it. It is sad because the instrumentals are so good, but is so hard to enjoy. This is a borderline 3, but I will let it slides
[3]

Total: 33/50
WINNER: Average12
-------------------------
Average Score of Each Song
omar: 6.2
average: 6.6
I give omar the consistency point because most of his where near that 6 range, but he needed some more standout songs

DISSES +2
FLOW +1
----------------
Round 1
--------------
FLOW: Athiest
I like his flow a lot and I think it rolled well off the tongue versus a choppy Gatorade flow. Gatorades flow was choppy and had lines with short versus then dragged on sentences without any spaces in between
DISSES: Athiest
Athiest directly critiqued Gatorade points versus Gatorade being. Gatorade just RiceGum's himself up and then Athiest claps back with diss. Athiest wins this round
-------------------
FLOW: Gatorade
Gatorade had a flow that was surprisingly pretty good and overall pretty good. I like the mild short versus a speed long verse, it flowed well versus the basic flow of Athiest. Better executed
DISSES: Tie
I think disses were equally clever and overall very close. I liked the bars that were spat and it is too close. Each side will get a point for this
So it is
4-2 Athiest

CON concedes that nurturing testicles is bad. so PRO wins

Here we go lets fill this baby up as a mega meme
rf3cwrcf\
\wrc
\]wrcce
cvw'
fevw
vef
qvef
vfe'
vef'
cvef'veqf'
evg'f
qev'f
ve'rf
f'e
vfe'
vef'
vef'
vef'vfe
f
e'vfe
qef'v]
efvq
fev
'efv
efv'
ev'
re'v
fev

(note: repost bc of an error)

CONDUCT: CON
Blatent rudeness by the PRO is clear here. Labeling people as "racist" and raised from "racist values," is not an on topic debate discussion. Personal attacks violate the sites COC, and turns their racist definition around. PRO was more irratable with his know it all attitude, and his cussing, leads me vote for CON

S&G: Punctuation errors. Doesn't deteriorate the debate, so no changes

SOURCES: CON
Sources were used by both. PROs source was wikipedia, which I count as more of a "reference" than a source. I also don't buy organization sources. They usually are very manipulative and try to lean you in a direction so they can get a consumers support. The facts are somewhat fipped. The other sources were not bad. PROs sources were simply better. While PRO does use organizations, these were clearly better and showed less bias. With various articles coming from reliable sources, my vote goes CON

ARGS: CON
It was hard to follow this debate and it seemed hard to keep track of points. I have a lot of into to site and it comes down to clarity and overall meaning and source citations

PRO relies on police to be the people, and the victimization of blacks and racism toward them. CON focused a lot on civilian to civilian crime and how the result show that blacks lead the charge. These points are kind of answered by the PRO, but not to the extend of a complete dismantling of the PROs main issue by CON. He states the flaws of the Michael Braun case and uses source to prove the overhyped. I am lost in the PROs rebutal and it leads me in different directions. This ends up stirring away from the case as such. A drop topic I noticed in the debate form the flows is the BTM being terrorists, which is extended by CON, but dropped. CON extends a little, and gives me clarity.

When it all comes down, I think CONs dismantling of the case made by PRO will lean my ballot CON for the arguments. He keep his attacks safe and prevents damage and builds off a lost argument by PRO by extending enough for validation of the point

Full Forfeit is bad

ARGS:

CON for arguments. Half concession in the last rounds causes his case to go uncontested and his points to be extended when the time came, where I take full validation of the points and lean

CON for Conduct: Forfeit is bad conduct

CON for Sources: In the arguments used, which I will take a count for, multiple meaningful sources were used to counter PROs point. If both argumetn were extended by the odds of the debate, CON would still take sources. Since effort is put in and he took the time to put in sources, I will give sources

Are you happy?

full forefeit, so enjoy Blueface Bby

Bust down Thotiana
Bust down Thotiana
I wanna see you bust
Speed it up, bring that shit up (on the gang)
Speed it, bring that shit back
On the gang
Blueface Baby

Forefeit is bad conduct. RM gets points for presenting better args too

FF by CON, while Type1 made one, making it a 1v0, therefore, forcing me to vote PRO