9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against
Debate Rounds (3)
I am a bit confused.
As Pro, you are supposed to argue for the resolution which is that it is hard to lose against you.
Your arguments in Round 1 is supporting the exact opposite.
As Con, I'm to argue that it is not hard to lose against you. In other words, I'm arguing that it is easy to lose against you.
I await Pro's response.
You have made my point: I tried to support my position, but I failed in round one, because my grammar was incorrect and worded in a run-on sentence.
Here, let me try fixing that sentence: I argue it is fairly hard to lose a debate against me. I have only won debates my opponents forfeited. Because of my one-sided topics that are usually way too biased, all my opponent has to do is minimum to no research at all. I even make up and accept extremely dumb debate topics, such as "This Debate is Stupid", "torture is cool", and "The age of the earth is over 10,000 years old" (seriously, I disagree with that.)
As you can all see, I am very hard to lose against.
I was supposed to argue that it is easy to lose against the Pro, but I'm willing to debate the opposite though it may be harder.
Before I begin my arguments, I will like to rebut some of the points made by Pro.
1. "I do not prepare for any of my debates, thus, I have to ab-lib along the way,"
How many people actually take time to prepare for debates? I don't and I only lost one debate. In fact, most debates do not need any preparations. One only needs to post what one thinks about a certain topic and what one doubts on one's opponents' arguments. Of all the debates out on this site, very small proportion of the users actually write out and edit their responses numerous times. As most people on this site are not professional debaters, they do not have time nor motivation to spent significant amount of time on their responses.
2. " I just scan over my response before I post it. "
This is another ubiquitous behavior that most users of this site do. Only a few people actually put in the effort to edit and look over their answers numerous times. They simply use the "check your spelling" function at the bottom of the page and submit.
3. "I tried to support my position, but I failed in round one, because my grammar was incorrect and worded in a run-on sentence"
Your grammar was not the issue in Round 1. It is the fact that Con, which is me, had to imply his stance using the double negative. There was confusion because the topic "9spaceking is fairly hard to lose against" becomes a double negative in Con's perspective. For example, as Con, I would have to argue that 9spaceking is not fairly hard to lose against, which is confusing. Therefore, it can even be argued that it is Con's fault of the confusion that had arisen in Round 1.
4. "I have only won debates my opponents forfeited"
This assertion is a fact. I went through Pro's profile and discovered that his opponents forfeited all six of the debates he has won in the past. However, this does not mean Pro is easy to lose against. It simply means that the opponents of Pro's debates were lazy and unmotivated.
5. " Because of my one-sided topics that are usually way too biased, all my opponent has to do is minimum to no research at all"
The fact that topics are one-sided does not indicate anything. If debates are way too biased, they are not debates at all. For example, the topic "who is bald," which Pro is debating currently, is not a debate.  Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines "debate" as "a contention by words or arguments."  Since the topic "who is bald" can not be a contention, it is not a debate.
6. "I even make up and accept extremely dumb debate topics"
It is my firm belief that no debates are stupid. Even topics such as "torture is cool" can be debated. Who is to decide whether a debate is dumb or not. Also, accepting extremely dumb debates do not support Pro's stance.
7. "As you can all see, I am very hard to lose against."
WHAT? All your arguments support the opposite that it is easy to lose against you. Which side are you debating? I cannot state my arguments if my stance is ambiguous. Please clarify...
Because of the confusion, I will present my arguments in Round 3 after Pro states the stance of Con.
I await Pro's clarification.
I argue that extremely dumb debates are trolled and only have one possible side to win. Debates such as "this debate is stupid" is simply...stupid!
"It is hard to lose against 9spaceking"....this means if you debate against this user, you are more likely to win rather than lose. "Hard"--difficult to do, "lose"--get less points than 9spaceking. I hope this clears it up.
In the previous round my opponent has reflected ALL my points! Congratulations, I've run out of points. As you can all see I am not prepared at all, I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against. This debate shows a good example of any other debate I lost.
In conclusion, it is hard to lose against 9spaceking--in other words, it's easy to win.
1. "Your number 7 clearly shows I have not prepared enough. It can be said from this that even my debate topics are weird and cannot be understood."
My confusion has nothing to do with your preparation. Most, if not all people, do not prepare their topics beforehand. They simply debate what they have on their mind or they choose their topics from a long list of potential topics available in the Internet. The fact that Pro chose this topic, which has never been debated before in the years of existence of humanity, indicates the originality and creativity of Pro. This shows that Pro is able to come up with novel ideas and present them to others.
2. "I argue that extremely dumb debates are trolled and only have one possible side to win. Debates such as "this debate is stupid" is simply...stupid!"
If the topic so severely biased, it is not debatable. As a result, although the topic may be accepted by others and may be present in this site, it is not a debate. Hence, Pro did not lose debating, he merely lost an argument. (See number 5 of my arguments in Round 2)
3. "It is hard to lose against 9spaceking"....this means if you debate against this user, you are more likely to win rather than lose. "Hard"--difficult to do, "lose"--get less points than 9spaceking."
Thank you for your clarification. However, I am still confused. All your points lead up to the stance that 9spaceking is easy to win against. This means that I am to argue that it is harder to win against 9spaceking. I would try refraining from using negatives in the topics.
4. "In the previous round my opponent has reflected ALL my points"
That is because of the confusion. I presented my arguments on the basis that I am arguing that Pro is not easy to win against the Pro as I mentioned in Round 2.
5. "As you can all see I am not prepared at all, I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against"
But neither am I. I haven't and will not prepare for these kinds of debates. If Pro does not support his positions, I am curious as to why he instigated this debate. Also, if Pro does not support his positions, that means that Pro conceded.
6. "I do not really support this position of opinion, and thus, I am easy to win against"
Oxford dictionary defines win as "be successful or victorious in (a contest or conflict)." If Pro simply concedes, it is not successful nor victorious for Con. Therefore, Pro is NOT easy to win against; it is easy to gain points and elo.
Now for my arguments.
Opposition has to put in an effort to win against Pro. I, 9spaceking's opponent, am spending time reading and typing my responses. If I were to simply accept and never put forth a response, I will surly lose.
This has been an interesting but confusion debate and I thank Pro, the instigator, for this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Geogeer 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually had to work very hard to show that one has to work hard to not to lose to 9space king in this debate. Thus Con has won the debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.