I forget, if you wish we can continue this debate otherwise i am ready to accept debate, but to continue you want accept my forfeiture, by saying sentence I accept his forfeiture that will not reflect in voting in your next round. I am ready to give round 1 and round 2 arguments on round 2.
Reason:
I consider this a 2-round debate. Both debaters started off well. The Pro gave detailed arguments like "water is not dry, so it must be wet" and "water makes other things wet, so it is wet." But in Round 1, the Con responded effectively by saying, “Fire makes things burn, but fire itself isn’t burned.”
This debate mainly focused on popular beliefs rather than strong factual evidence. Although the Pro included some sources, they were mostly dictionary definitions and he didn’t explain why he chose them. Also, the Pro failed to properly explain why water is not dry — he just kept repeating the same idea without solid reasoning or scientific backing. In Round 2, the Pro repeated his earlier points, and the Con almost forfeited without completing his arguments.
Overall, the debate felt incomplete. The Con’s argument was simple and catchy, but both sides lacked depth and didn't build their cases properly. Since the debate was unfinished and mostly based on opinions or common myths, I’m voting for a tie. In terms of conduct and legibility, it's also a tie. I can't fully accept sources that are just dictionary definitions without proper explanation.
Removal of vote of pierree by barney is not acceptable, Barney saying vote is not well defined, It is totally understandable. As per voting policy forfeiture reduces conduct point, pierree mentioned it,anyone can accept this vote except brainless Barney, A cheapest moderator, brainless idiot not considered pierree's effort and time, but barney voted by just saying forfeiture.
Reason:
Both pro and con explained their views shortly in round 2, so i consider argument of pro and con as tie, neither of the above produced sources, due to forfeiture of pro from round 1 itself also pro forfeits 50% debate so in conduct wise con is won, Also con strongly argued against pro by saying women have major role in pregnancy. considering all these factors i vote for con.
you removed my votes several times for not providing enough reason, but they not provided enough reason , not said why con won. you saying reason instead of them, you can remove their votes, they can revote with enough reason.
I just asked you and some body to vote on this topic, because sometimes topic is not visible. but i neither asked any to vote for me, who complained me ,idk
I not received any warning from you or any moderators, whether you have any evidence that I tried to influence individual voter. I not influenced any person. you know now who is influencing voters.
These arguments are written by a human being called Rohith that is me. You can read arguments fully . But its grammar alone improved by ai. there is no rule in this site policy inhibiting Ai use. but these are arguments are fully written by me by spending my thoughts and time. Round 3 is not edited by ai.
Go and debate on stage why you using this platform. I can't understand why such people opposing use of new technologies , These uncles want to live in stone age, but mistake they are born now.
This debate is cancelled , Winner must not be selected.
Thanks for your detailed report.
English is just a language , it does not reflect your intelligence.
yes,i seen
I am eager to debate.
I forget, if you wish we can continue this debate otherwise i am ready to accept debate, but to continue you want accept my forfeiture, by saying sentence I accept his forfeiture that will not reflect in voting in your next round. I am ready to give round 1 and round 2 arguments on round 2.
Reason:
I consider this a 2-round debate. Both debaters started off well. The Pro gave detailed arguments like "water is not dry, so it must be wet" and "water makes other things wet, so it is wet." But in Round 1, the Con responded effectively by saying, “Fire makes things burn, but fire itself isn’t burned.”
This debate mainly focused on popular beliefs rather than strong factual evidence. Although the Pro included some sources, they were mostly dictionary definitions and he didn’t explain why he chose them. Also, the Pro failed to properly explain why water is not dry — he just kept repeating the same idea without solid reasoning or scientific backing. In Round 2, the Pro repeated his earlier points, and the Con almost forfeited without completing his arguments.
Overall, the debate felt incomplete. The Con’s argument was simple and catchy, but both sides lacked depth and didn't build their cases properly. Since the debate was unfinished and mostly based on opinions or common myths, I’m voting for a tie. In terms of conduct and legibility, it's also a tie. I can't fully accept sources that are just dictionary definitions without proper explanation.
I vote as tie
Removal of vote of pierree by barney is not acceptable, Barney saying vote is not well defined, It is totally understandable. As per voting policy forfeiture reduces conduct point, pierree mentioned it,anyone can accept this vote except brainless Barney, A cheapest moderator, brainless idiot not considered pierree's effort and time, but barney voted by just saying forfeiture.
My vote goes to con
Reason:
Both pro and con explained their views shortly in round 2, so i consider argument of pro and con as tie, neither of the above produced sources, due to forfeiture of pro from round 1 itself also pro forfeits 50% debate so in conduct wise con is won, Also con strongly argued against pro by saying women have major role in pregnancy. considering all these factors i vote for con.
yes
round 2 is not modified by ai
Moderators please inform your developers to consider blank space as forfeiture.
ok i finish this, you cannot satisfy my questions as well as i cannot satisfy my opinions to you.
whether ok , and blank space is an argument?
I am not asking reason from you , I asked them to add this reason on their votes. ok provide me a reason why you won't remove their votes
I kindly ask you to remove votes of TheRizzler,Barney,AdaptableRatman
They not provided reason why con won, you are my last trust
idk know why you supporting them.
you removed my votes several times for not providing enough reason, but they not provided enough reason , not said why con won. you saying reason instead of them, you can remove their votes, they can revote with enough reason.
That is totally unfair, you giving reason instead of them
TheRizzler vote should be removed , he not provided reason , why con won
AdaptableRatman vote should be removed, he not provide why con won, he only said pro is forfeited.
Barney's vote should be removed, he provide his reason that pro is failed , but not provided reason why con won.
here pro argues for USA and for India
ok i consider it.
I not received any warning, and no one have right except Truthful moderators alone to warn, i not consider normal persons as warnigs that is advice.
although i tagged them , i not asked to consider in voting,
whether i don't have right to say my opinion in comment, only few sees comment , i not sent that to any single person, are asked to consider to voters
I just asked you and some body to vote on this topic, because sometimes topic is not visible. but i neither asked any to vote for me, who complained me ,idk
Where you found that I am influencing voters
I not received any warning from you or any moderators, whether you have any evidence that I tried to influence individual voter. I not influenced any person. you know now who is influencing voters.
I not used ai in round 1 and 3, used ai in round 2 for improving style. not my words.
These arguments are written by a human being called Rohith that is me. You can read arguments fully . But its grammar alone improved by ai. there is no rule in this site policy inhibiting Ai use. but these are arguments are fully written by me by spending my thoughts and time. Round 3 is not edited by ai.
So many boomers in this world.
Daring title selection, hard for pro to win
Go and debate on stage why you using this platform. I can't understand why such people opposing use of new technologies , These uncles want to live in stone age, but mistake they are born now.
advices are not needed for me now, Thank you
Base essay is written by me and its style and grammar is improved by chatgpt for better understanding of all people.
In this full debate con considered only his perspective he not considered other people, he thinking all people are like him.
ok.
Thanks for your deep analysis on my debate.
I support fauxlaw's opinion.
Yes, i voted in emotions wrongly.
Can you clarify me this topic, I think you saying Powerful people should protect weak people, whether it is mentally or physically.
No any jobs, so robots work for us and each government gives a standard income for all.
Are you ready for next round.
Jonrohith voted by emotions, not provided any reason.
Moozer325 doesn't give reason why he voted for pro, he only says con is forfeit.
TheRizzler voted just against me ,not given any reason
It is an incompleted debate, sorry i voted wrongly ,i should be vote for tie.
"its really good because it could take over our jobs"
It also have this meaning, as ai took our jobs we are stress free, and sophisticated, so ai is good.