The Instigator
saboosa
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
AlexanderOc
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Aerogant is rude to his apponents

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 3 votes the winner is...
AlexanderOc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/10/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 749 times Debate No: 60282
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (3)

 

saboosa

Pro

I am arguing that "Aerogant" is rude to his debaters.
AlexanderOc

Con

As far as we know, Aerogant doesn't own any debaters. Therefore he cannot be rude to them.

Pro would have to prove Aerogant owns debaters in order to prove he is rude to them.
Debate Round No. 1
saboosa

Pro

Thats not true, he insults them and calls them names. He called me a "fool" and someone else "the most useless blob of matter on this planet"
AlexanderOc

Con

He spammed about how intellectually challenged I am in a our debate, that's irrelevant though. Because he does not own me. So I'm not his debater. Nor am I his "apponent".
Unless he owns you, then him calling you names is not relevant to the resolution.

Debate Round No. 2
saboosa

Pro

It is realavent to this topic because you are giving an example, thank you for pointing that out. He may be nice to you, but if you check all of his debates, 90% of them he is rude to people on. And once again, the "owns" thing is simply not true.
AlexanderOc

Con

AlexanderOc forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mister_Man 2 years ago
Mister_Man
Not sure why the hell everyone is voting for Alex; not only did he forfeit, but he relied purely on semantics and did not address anything regarding how disrespectful Aerogant is.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
I forfeited, I'm pretty sure that's grounds for an auto-loss Domr.
Posted by NiamC 2 years ago
NiamC
blatant framers-intent
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
Rodney and I*
Posted by ricksterpr0 2 years ago
ricksterpr0
I agree with alexanderoc

"his" implies possession.

For example "Me and Rodney were in his car smoking weed"

Who's car is it?

Most likely Rodney's but they were high so the author may think it is his car, but it in reality the two could be sitting in an industrial trash compactor with little awareness of their surroundings.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
Yeah, I know. It was a shameful argument. I'll make up for it in the final round.
Posted by ThinkingPunk 2 years ago
ThinkingPunk
If you are going to do a semantic argument, at least try to be smart about it...
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
The word his doesn't imply ownership in this context. If you're going to play semantics do it correctly and point to a debate wher arrogant wasn't rude.
Posted by AlexanderOc 2 years ago
AlexanderOc
I know ):I'll try harder next round.
Posted by TruthHurts 2 years ago
TruthHurts
While I understand the attempted snipe, "his," or, indeed, any possessive, does not necessarily imply strict ownership. For instance, if I say, during a debate, "my opponent says..." this does not mean I own them, only that they relate to me in some context. Bad semantic argument, AlexanderOC.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by AlternativeDavid 2 years ago
AlternativeDavid
saboosaAlexanderOcTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:16 
Reasons for voting decision: ff in final round. Pro had terrible spelling. Con proved that Aerogant does not possess any debaters. Pro made multiple claims without sourcing them.
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
Domr
saboosaAlexanderOcTied
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:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Con proved that no one is considered Aerogant's "debaters" as he does not own or control anyone other than himself. Conduct point for last round FF. Spelling from the title and in the debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
saboosaAlexanderOcTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments go to pro due to cons semantics. Conduct too.