Total votes: 34
How this is a tie is beyond reason. There is no debate. There should be no points awarded to either one. . This "point system" needs to be revamped.
Pro did not participate.
Con forfeited
No much of a debate. Con forfeited.
There was no debate. Both sides forfeited. This is hardly a "tie", but the voting system is flawed.
Items like this should by deleted after the "voting" period, and made as if they never happened.
Conduct points go to Pro as Con FF all but one round.
Conduct points awarded to Pro because Pro had the ONLY non FF round.
Con got bored and FF
Con conceded and forfeited the debate.
CON forfeited two rounds.
Pro FF in round 2
Pro had some points made, while Con seemed disinterested in the debate.
Easy decision on vote. Pro FF.
Pro forfeited every round, therefore points go to Con for argument, and conduct.
Round one was a tie.
Rounds 2 and 5 go to con
Rounds 3 and 4 go to pro.
Overall a tie.
I would suggest that both pro and con visit a nutritionist in the near future. They need more fruits and veggies, and less processed foods.
Basically a tie had Con not forfeited.
Conduct goes to PRO
Pro gave no argument, and no sources
Con at least had some point made and some source used.
Pro's conduct was poor in that Pro did not engage the issue.
Good arguments from both parties, but no clear winner.
Con actually did not debate, so conduct points go to Pro.
Pro's source was suspect.
nolo contendere
The debate was flawed from the beginning ( i.e. it was in the form of a question rather than a proposition such as "morality is not a valid argument against Abortion")
Then there is the policy of forfeiture to consider. I am disregarding this policy because they both forfeited equally.
The better argument points then go to Pro.
Both parties had reasonable arguments, but Pro failed in BOP.
Pro never showed that the majority of travelers would find that the utility of electrics was better than that of "enclosed " vehicles.
I am giving argument points to Con.
Pro could have won. Both parties had good arguments, but got hung up on defining "dysfunctional".
Had Pro pressed for a more clear idea such as "society is not functioning as well as it could" , Pro could have won.
Because Pro forfeited a rounds, I sadly award points to Con
Both Pro and Con gave good arguments, with Con having a slight edge.
I gave conduct to Pro since Con forfeited 2 rounds.
Pro had essentially no argument and no sources.
I am judging that having having essentially no argument and no sources makes for poor conduct.
I have voted accordingly.
Pro offered little in the way of factual information. Con countered by at least addressing the topic.
Pro's arguments were disjointed and repetitious. Pro failed to distinguish between "gender" and "gender identity"
Overall, a weak debate, but points go to Con.
Pro gave no argument
Con gave no argument
Ergo a tie