The Instigator
weather
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
resolutionsmasher
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

An online debate is not as fun as a in person rapid fire debate.

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 4 votes the winner is...
resolutionsmasher
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,673 times Debate No: 7234
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (4)

 

weather

Pro

I believe it is much more fun to debate on a rapid fire debate because you can't look them in the eye, be quick witted or step on their throats and say "ha!" On this site the have at least 5 minuets to argue, that's way to much time. In a in person debate you can see if you have made them uncomfortable, and you or your team can pounce, that's the way it works with a rapid fire. you can attack them until they are almost on the ground they are so sunken into their seats and than drive the nail in the coffin and they try to defend, which you cut down.
resolutionsmasher

Con

Online debates are the bomb diggidy dude.
Reasons Why:
1. I can look you in the eye (or at least your profile's (if it has eyes))
2. I can be quickwitted online. I write my counter arguements fast every time. OH and you can set the time limits to match that of an actual online debate if you so choose.
3. I can step on your case's throat and say 'ha' any time I want so there HAHAHAHAHA (creepy evil laugh)
4. You can use any extra time in a debate to do research and improve your case mid-debate. Making it more of a challenge and therefore more fun.
5. Trust me, I don't have to see you to know that I'm making you uncomfortable. ;)
6. You can question the crap out of your opponent on the comments page if you want.
7. An online debate is just plain better in every way you can imagine.
8. Just think, every time you debate online you see how they always know how to answer your attacks, know your train to thought and kick your case into the ground.

That's why online so pones rapid-fire any time, any where.
see See SEe SEE HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Debate Round No. 1
weather

Pro

with the way your talking, you seem to be from the Ezra before the Internet.
1 You can't look m in the eye! I have a buoy, and I meant to see the reaction, and scare them.
2 They always have time to react you you cant talk them into a corner, and there are at most 5 rounds, not enough time.
3 not everyone is flexible enough to stick their foot on the computer screen, and if you say "ha" it is not heard
4 the time mid debate is to much, the improvement of your case isn't good because if you have the upper hand they will eventually.
5 now you can see the discomfort, and take advantage, like a smoking hot chick (your age) debates you, you may be a wee bit discomforted, if your shy. but online you don't know, you could be debating a 43 year old fat guy in Canada
6 no you can't you can't, if you question the crap out of them, if you did they could block/delete the questions
7 need I bring up the the English parliament again?
8. what?

a in person rapid fire debate is much better because you may someday get arthritis in your hands and verbal debates wont wear out your limbs.
resolutionsmasher

Con

If you want to get literal ok!

1. Where I come from you are not allowed to make eye contact with your opponent during a debate.
2. If you can't say what you need to say in less than five rounds then you got problems not debate.org
3. I wouldn't advise screaming 'ha' at your opponents in the middle of a proffesional debate. Nor is it legal to stomp on thier throats.
4. This challenge you bring up is the difficulty that makes online debating fun.
5. Not knowing who you're debating is what makes online debate more fun. It's not exactly fun to get 'discomforted'
6. No they wouldn't, as long as you don't use obsenities or racial slurs, which I'm pretty sure you can't do in a real debate either.
7. The English Parliament is a failed attempt at representational government and is thus stupid.
8. What do you mean 'what?'
9. Your jaw is a joint and therefore can contract arthritis in it. so your point is moot.
Debate Round No. 2
weather

Pro

1 Where do you come from? Not only can you make eye contact (accept in Oklahoma city) but you can read body language on a in person debate.
2 You cant talk fast to get your point in, in person there is a 30 minuet period to talk, online there is a 8000 limit
3 You can scream 'Ha' towards the end of the debate, if you are winning.
4 It isn't fun to loose!!
5 No it isn't fun to get 'discomforted' but it is fun to 'discomfort'
6 No, you said question the crap out of tier profile, you can block someone if you haven't noticed.
7 You pushed me to far on this one
now that is fun
8 You defence has no logic.
9 You wont if you mumble!

You can't go blurry eyed in a in person debate unless you have written your argument.
resolutionsmasher

Con

1. The rule book says no eye contact because it uses intimidation tactics to win rather than just plain good debating skills, which those who use intimidation tactics seem to be at a loss for.
2. As I've said before if you can't voice your thoughts in either of those limits then your like the english parliament, STUPID.
3. I don't care where you're from, screaming 'HA' at any point in a debate is unprofessional and disruptfull to the debate, and is likely to get you removed from the room.
4. That's a moot point. You can lose in an online debate and a live debate.
5. Again, you can discomfort someone online too.
6. I 'said' ON THE COMMENTS PAGE!!!!!!!
7. He admits to having fun in this debate in his seventh point. Meaning he cantradicts his entire case and agrees with me.
8. What defence! I don't need one because you only attacked it with the word 'what?' Thus a defence is not required.
9. If you mumble you lose the debate because all the judge hears is mmmmmmhgmgmamivpanrivna;kr.
10. Buy a computer that has an eye-friendly screen like the one I'm using now. It doesn't cost extra if you get it from either Mac or HP.
Debate Round No. 3
weather

Pro

1 Well where I come from you can intimidate people, I am a big guy, and I can intimidate anyone.
2 those guys in the English parliament seem to be voicing their thoughts in the background,
3 Denny Crane
4 that was in response to point 4 in round 2 "4. This challenge you bring up is the difficulty that makes online debating fun." and I said no one likes to loose, but it is easier in person.
5 you can discomfort someone online, but it cant be seen and taken advantage of.
6 I did miss-read your argument, there is most likely some clueless person who doesn't know what the comments page is, and your secondary questioning goes unheard
7 If you could not tell the video was under point 7 and I was referring to the video by fun.
8 round 1"Just think, every time you debate online you see how they always know how to answer your attacks, know your train to thought and kick your case into the ground." what the hoo-da-hey does that mean???
9 than the other guy who may be able to understand can question, and their is no proof that he said that because he mumbled, and how can you say ";"?
10 eye friendly screens might me bad for the environment

Some people cant debate online because the cable has gone out or the power has gone out, or their computer crashed, or they don't have a computer, or a glass bird was dropped on their laptop. The in person debate has a wide range of adaptability for those reasons. Don't forget all the strongly opinionated people who don't know about online debating, like my English teacher, he would destroy all of you in a "Narnia vs Lord of the Rings" debate, But he doesn't know about this wed site. Thank you Internet you reading and thank you resloutionmaster for taking the challenge
resolutionsmasher

Con

1. You wouldn't intimidate me or any other worthy debater
2. Screw those non-representing stupid idiots in England. Their party chooses the candidates and not the people so they're non-freakin-representational idiots!!!
3. Denny Crane my rear end. He loses any debate by professional debate standards for all the crap he pulls.
4. Doesn't matter. It's easier in person for both debaters and therefore nullifies your entire point. so by your standards 'HA'
5. Point made, but still you discomfort people and I know it when it happens. For example. I'm not discomforting you right now. I don't know how I know, I just notice that kind of thing and most people do.
6. Clueless people need to get clued in or leave. And as to the secondary questioning, not necessarily
7. My computer doesn't stream videos so your debate is just text to me
8. I'm referring to the ability of most debaters to anticipate attacks and pre-prepare for them. making debates more interesting
9. Look, your whole mumbling thing is pointless. Also you say ";" by saying the word semi-colon or at least that's how my computer says it when I tell it to read my text back to me. Oh and hoo-da-hey sounds funny when you use the computer to say it.
10. It's just a different shape of glass so it changes nothing for the environment.
11. Well what if there's nobody around to debate with live. Then you turn to the internet where there is always somebody.

Much thanks to all and to all a good day/night/whenever you are.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Oh my god!!!!!
BUNNY DIED!!!!!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
You know what. I think I'll take this debate just for old time's sake.
()__()
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Posted by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
Rapid-fire debates are so much easier because you opponent can't do research in the midst of the debate. But the challenge that this provides in online debates is good. I hones your skills and allows for more time to think. Also you can juggle debates online.
Posted by Alex 8 years ago
Alex
Rapid Fire debating is only better in the sense that you have to think off the top of your head, but in these debates you have time to put out a well thought out debate with other sources and statistics.
Posted by Harlan 8 years ago
Harlan
Yeah, the British parliament is pretty funny. Especially when compared to the formality of the American congress.
Posted by weather 8 years ago
weather
Have you seen the English parliament?

now that is a good debate
Posted by Nail_Bat 8 years ago
Nail_Bat
Rapid fire debates are only fun if your position is a bunch of talking points and easily digested nuggets of information. (mmmm....easily digested nuggets).

Unless you think what you see on the O'Reilly Factor is the shining example of what a debate should be.
Posted by weather 8 years ago
weather
FoR NARNIA AND FOR ASLAN!!
Posted by weather 8 years ago
weather
I see
Posted by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
Narnia!
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by RacH3ll3 8 years ago
RacH3ll3
weatherresolutionsmasherTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by cool_dude 8 years ago
cool_dude
weatherresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:07 
Vote Placed by Epicism 8 years ago
Epicism
weatherresolutionsmasherTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 8 years ago
resolutionsmasher
weatherresolutionsmasherTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:07