The Instigator
Wylted
Pro (for)
Winning
62 Points
The Contender
9spaceking
Con (against)
Losing
54 Points

1 gapping should be federal law or at least a social norm.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 31 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/25/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 9,994 times Debate No: 59523
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (141)
Votes (31)

 

Wylted

Pro

I hate people that don't one gap, and think it's absurd not to.

No I won't define 1 gapping, and yes we'll be using my definition. It will be a fair definition and if you don't know what one gapping is you're probably one of those jerks that don't do it anyway, so I want to debate you.
9spaceking

Con

I don't know what 1 gapping is but would like to suicide in yet another debate, this time honorably against the mighty Wylted.
I may lose but I intend to troll the heck out of this debate.

Guesses of what "one gap" is:
One gap is this:http://sports.stackexchange.com...


One gap is this:


One gap is this:

One gap is this:


One gap is this:


One gap is this:


One gap is this:


One gap is this:
s://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...; alt="" width="694" height="398" />

One gap is this:


One gaps is this:


One gaps is this:
http://d20uo2axdbh83k.cloudfront.net...; alt="" />

Tell me if I do get it right, okay Wylted?
Debate Round No. 1
Wylted

Pro

Definition

1 Gap- A common courtesy that should be mandate by law. It means to leave a gap of one space.

Examples: Please click on links to see photos

http://www.debate.org...

http://www.debate.org...

Here are examples of people not one gapping.

http://www.debate.org...

http://www.debate.org...

Why?

It's ignorant to stand beside somebody at a urinal when they're trying to pee. Just 1 gap it an move a urinal space over. It's okay not to 1 gap in crowded bathrooms, but just be respectful and do it in empty bathrooms. Some people are gun shy and can't pee when other men are close by trying to make conversation with them. Also you have things such as extra splash back to consider. Pee always splashes back at the microscopic level and 1 gapping will help prevent some of that splash back from hitting others.
9spaceking

Con

Absolutely disturbing. I'm not sure how to troll this, so I'll take this seriously.
My opponent makes very few arguments but important ones nevertheless. "Some people are gun shy and can't pee when other men are close by trying to make conversation with them. Also you have things such as extra splash back to consider. Pee always splashes back at the microscopic level and 1 gapping will help prevent some of that splash back from hitting others." He says. However, no research, no backup, NOTHING shows this at all. Nothing even suggests other men are going to try to make conversation. Peeing only takes like 10 seconds at maximum anyways. That microscopic level is so less it won't hit the other people anyways. As for federal law, well it's far too difficult to do. What you gonna do--put a police in the bathroom?
You'll have to try harder, Wylted. This is the least effort I've seen you use on a debate, EVER.
Debate Round No. 2
Wylted

Pro

My opponent asserts I have no proof of certain things. However these things are common knowledge.

Splash back exists and has been intensely researched by science. It's apparently an important enough phenomenon to throw countless dollars at figuring out. http://www.nbcnews.com...

Conversation at the urinal is also a fact as well. Here is a partial list of things said to me at a urinal;

"You have a nice flow, your prostate must be really healthy"

"You're pretty"

"Hey buddy, do you have the time?"

WTF is wrong with people?

Shy bladder syndrome is another real phenomenon. http://m.betterhealth.vic.gov.au...

This phenomenon can be helped immensely by making 1 gapping the federal law or at least a social norm.

Con asks if police should be in the bathroom, and I say yes, but I'm arguing that at the very least 1 gapping should be social norm.
9spaceking

Con

I don't know what to say to my opponent's arguments. He's either trolling me or he's masterfully manipulating around the laws of science.

The splash back is so less, nobody cares. Nobody complains. It is not a big enough problem for Obama to even remotely care about, because he has his own private bathroom. See: http://www.ilaxstudio.com....

As for the shy bladder syndrome, that can be easily treated by Relaxation techniques, Psychotherapy, Cognitive behaviour therapy, and Graduated exposure therapy, as noted by my opponent's source.

Finally, 1 gapping is stupid--it wastes toilets and ultimately a crowded bathroom would not let this law/norm work out. A better solution would be putting toilets further apart, or having stalls that separate the toilets. If the girls can do it, so can the guys.

In conclusion I have upheld my part of the resolution and suggested a better and more efficient alternative that let people zero gap.

Also, why not two gap?
Debate Round No. 3
Wylted

Pro

1 gapping as pointed out in round 2 doesn't apply to crowded bathrooms. Individuals needing to relieve themselves would file in by 1 gapping, but as the bathroom got more crowded they would start filling in the gaps. This is the most ethical and efficient means for peeing in urinals. It reduces the chance of splashing back on the next guys legs, helps shy bladders and stops strange urinal convo's before they start.

This is a huge problem. I can't tell you how many times I've had to face these awkward social situations. My opponent proposes solutions such as psychotherapy and stalls which cost money. 1 gapping is free.

Obviously 1 gapping should at least be a social norm. When giving the choice of 1 gapping and standing at a urinal directly beside another man, why would you not 1 gap?

Just because my opponent doesn't mind how close other men stand to him while whiping his schlong out to urinate doesn't mean others don't, and I'd appreciate if he respected urinators a little more.
9spaceking

Con

FINAL ROUND
My opponent has still failed to rebut my solution of placing the toilets further from each other when constructing toilets.
Far-away toilets in fact are already being constructed in some particular areas.


Furthermore there are already normally "walls" separating toilets in many different areas, showing us that one gapping is completely not needed in these situations, since the splash cannot go anywhere and your job of concentrating on your job is much easier.



VOTE ME.

BTW Why the heck is the character limit 1,000???
Debate Round No. 4
141 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
there we go. Our rightful winner. Good debate.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Lol, leave it to the Mormons to research this stuff in University labs. Jeez.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Thanks Preston for not only your honesty but your courage in admitting it and your honor in rectifying it.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
I doubt I'll keep this new lead.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
Preston is the only one. He can only give one more point. The good voter gives you three points because you won arguments. Problem solved.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
If I break the tie it doesn't matter one of your friends will alter their vote to justify giving you more points, so you win.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
lol, good. Ask a bunch of top debaters or something. Ye only need ONE VOTE.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
I only ask good voters for votes, because I'm aware if the inherent bias that comes along with the request when asking weaker voters.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
in merely 4 hours.
Posted by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
anyhow, I'm not asking anyone else, so if you want to win, you're gonna have to go break the tie
31 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Good debate guys. Conduct & S/G are tied. Neither gave reason to award points to either themselves or their opponent. Arguments - Pro. Barely! Personally, I feel like Pro failed to uphold half this resolution, and that conflicts me greatly in awarding these points to him. The federal law part was shut down almost instantly by Con. The social norm part though was his saving grace and that is what gave him the win in this case. While Con showed that alternatives exist, the argument was introduced in the last round and I find that an extremely cheap tactic. Pro showed with real scientific data that one-gapping would be beneficial if a social norm based on spray-back, awkward conversations, and personal space issues. Con's rebuttals fell short - saying no-one cares about spray-back is an absolute statement which is obviously false for instance. The Obama point didn't help either because if he didn't care he wouldn't need a private bathroom. Sources - Pro. Used highly quality sources.
Vote Placed by Preston 3 years ago
Preston
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Hahahaha, im laughing so hard, con presents a valid argument about spacing between urnals and then shows a picture of 2 next to each other, you cannot gap if theres only 2, he also provided more pictures as sources. Conduct because I felt gapping should have been defined round 1. im placing conduct infavor of con because pro was right, my vote had been made I shouldn't screw with it.
Vote Placed by XLAV 3 years ago
XLAV
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and spelling and grammar are a tie. Con was able to give a sufficient alternative solution on the last round for the splashbacks, akward social situations, federal law part, but he didn't give any arguments for the social norm part. Argument points go to Pro. Pro also provided more trustworthy sources then Con did. The only source Con gave was about Obama's private bathroom. Private bathrooms usually have 1 toilet so I don't see how that is even relevant to the debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Such an odd debate... Arguments were close, my instincts are to agree with pro due to the splash-back (con probably should have countered with R Kelly), and con did flip flop on if he would troll or not... Yet I am left unsure if this was a troll debate or a serious one, and con did make me laugh more... (update here) the issue I forgot when I first read this, was the social norm factor, which con's counters for of having dividers is great, but it's still weird when it happens. About like sitting on an empty bus, someone else gets on and takes the seat next to you. Giving people their space should be a social norm, and the problem is bad enough to call for all that government funded research. Conduct seemed fine all around, even if there was an odd setup, con agreed to it. S&G were fine. Sources... not enough sources to award.
Vote Placed by schachdame 3 years ago
schachdame
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:41 
Reasons for voting decision: For this one I have to interpret the 7-point-system unusually free to make a vote. Conduct to Con, because Pro forced Con to throw away the first round with the late topic reveal. Spelling was equal but I award the points to Pro for an overall nicer language performance (Con: "Why the heck[...]???"). Arguments go to Pro because I could find some logic and sense in them. And no source points for anyone because no source given, was any close to properly reliable.
Vote Placed by Bennett91 3 years ago
Bennett91
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had better arguments and rebuttals. I think Pro is just venting his pee shy frustration out on a culture that simply just wants to chat with him while he's peeing.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: OK I have to give debate arguments to Pro, and what I suspected would be an easy vote turned out to take a hell of a lot of thinking. In this debate Con had to show that one gapping should not be a federal law or at least a social norm. I think this was an almost impossible proposition to win as it was so broad even though Con tried valiantly. In the final round Con gave examples which could counter problems posed by Pro and this in a bizarre twist made me side with Pro. Up till this point I was going to vote a tie. However, in effect these solutions presented by Con would be effecting a one gap principle. As such I have decided to give argument points to Pro.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 3 years ago
1Historygenius
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: In the debate as it is, about 1 gapping being federal law OR at least a social norm, I think Pro won it. I feel there is a difference between actual law and imposing it on social norms, but whatever this wasn't my debate. On a final note about the definition. It felt to me that Pro wanted his opponent to guess and then he would tell the opponent what it really is in round 2. That's weird but no harm came of it.
Vote Placed by brant.merrell 3 years ago
brant.merrell
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments: Pro. Con would have won if, as Con seemed to believe when he mentioned police in the bathroom, this were a legal argument. The category was society, and Pro worded his proposition as "should be a social norm." Lots of things should be social norms that never will be, and that should never be laws. Sources: TIED. PRO's links beat CON's links, no question. CON, amazingly, provided eight excellent picture-guesses of what 1-gapping was, before PRO even defined 1-gapping at all. I almost gave him sources just for that, but decided to be kind of mature. Spelling and Grammar: what, you think I would read every word of this awesome but really stupid debate? Conduct: yeah . . . not saying what 1-gapping was in round 1 . . . yeah . . .
Vote Placed by T_parkour 3 years ago
T_parkour
Wylted9spacekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Con. Pro did not bother to define the term "one gapping" until round 2, even though it was crucial to the debate. Pro also called the people who don't know what it is "one of those jerks that don't do it anyway." Spelling and Grammar: Tied. Neither side had any glaring problems with their spelling and grammar. Arguments: Con. Pro did not give evidence or proof of his claims until he was called out for it. Con also gave ways to solve the problem without making it a law. Sources: Con. As Pro did not define "one gapping," all of Con's picture sources in round 1 were relevant. Both Pro and Con had accurate sources, but Con had more.