The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Anyone with a beard should be banned from DDO

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/12/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 731 times Debate No: 80863
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (1)




DDO should be a place ONLY for people without beards.


1. No semantics.
2. No K's.
3. Con cannot use the argument that it does not harm anyone, as this argument is invalid.
4. Con cannot use any sources of any kind.
5. Con can not use the letter "C".
6. Con must begin the debate with a tongue twister every round, and it has to be unique every time.

Failure to abide by these rules will result in an immediate win for me, unless can write a 3 paragraph essay on why sex is a tool of the devil. The paragraphs must each be at least 8 sentences long, with each sentence being at least a line long. In the essay, Con may not use the letters "C" "D" "U", or "F".

First round is acceptance.
Happy debating!


I'm ready to debate.
Debate Round No. 1


I would say that Con broke the rules by not putting a tongue twister at the beginning of the first round, but considering it was for acceptance, I'll let that slide. Why? I am a nice person. You're welcome, Con.

Now for my arguments.

It would stimulate the economy.

Think of all the shaving cream and shavers that would be bought! Businesses would prosper! In addition, people would get better at shaving, because they would have to. This could lead to the option of getting a job in hairstyling for many poeple. Unemployment could go down by as much as 0.001%!

It's easy.

Practically anyone can get a shaver! All it takes is a trip to the store and a few dollars. Even if one are far away from a store, a shaver can easily be bought online, and then brought to the mailing adress of the person who has the beard. So go on! Buy a shaver! What are you, poor or something?


For all the people who are too poor to get razors, fundraisers can be held to help them! This would help people get shavers while further stimulating the ecomomy and providing entertainment.

Beards cause suffering

People who have beards make all the people who can't grow one very sad. Why should some people be able to grow beards, while other people wallow in sadness.


People with beards should be discouraged from live debates by not being able to participate in online ones. If a person who has a beard is speaking, vibrations from the sound could cause hair from the beard could fall, and get on things.

From these arguments, it is clear that DDO should be restricted to people who do not have beards.



Sally sold sea shells on the sea shore, motherf**ker.

There's no money gain from the Pro side. People already do that in the status quo, meaning that affirming doesn't really bring about this result. Moreover, this is more helpful for my side of the debate. Think of all the formal styling kits and hair support treatments that are more expensive than just any old shaving stuff and bad rasors. Getting rid of all the beards would eliminate the need for these things, meaning that less money overall is being generated.

On ease of use, do you know what's even easier than shaving a beard? Not shaving at all. You literally don't have to do anything. Not shaving the glorious beard will always be easier. If anything super long beards just look more bada**. Pro seems to be the only person who disagrees.

As for the fundraising part, there's no reason why I'm unable to do this as well. It would be named "Beard Battles" and would seek to find the most bada** beards and reward them with styling kits to further maintain their bada**ness.

And if we're going to take away people's rights to grow beards, that would just enable more suffering for those who are able to grow beards and aren't allowed to. Beards are a gift we should allow to flourish and understand rather than oppress.

As for the sounds making hair fall off of the glorious beard, this really isn't that big of a problem. But not only is this not true, but infinitely more hair would fall off and get onto things if we were to shave every beard in the world. This means that by negating we keep more hair off the ground and other things.
Debate Round No. 2


Sorry for the short argument, I'm busy so it was either this or nothing.

Bad shavers may be expensive, but we should create the best beard removing instruments known to mankind. This would improve capitalism.

I know, I'm just saying my resolution doesn't take a lot of work to achieve, and it is practical.

Your fundraiser is stupid. Mine is better. At least mine can have an educational factor: Teaching people about the evils of beards. They will destroy you. Which brinks me to refute your next argument.

Beards killed my family. You think this is all a game? Pathetic beard - haver. You will never understand the suffering beards cause until you experience it yourself. Beards are not a gift, but a curse.

Notice that the resolution is that "Anyone with a beard should be banned from DDO", and not "Every beard in the world should be shaved". Besides, it is better to have hair fall off of beards in a controlled environment.


I saw Susie sitting in a shoe shine shop.

Where she sits she shines, and where she shines she sits.

Pro's Arguments:

With the burden of proof being on pro, he has to be showing how his arguments are enough warrant to win the debate. He's not doing that, so you're voting him down.

Money Gain:

Extend my response that in the status quo that we already sell razors and things to shave a beard with, so saying that Pro will sell theses things to earn money doesn't really give him an unique offensive argument. It's not like razors wouldn't be sold if we negated instead of affirmed. He doesn't give any kind of response to this. Don't let him give one in the last round as that would be unfair to me (as if this debate isn't already unfair enough).

But then, extend my response that negating brings more money in than affirming due to hair styling kits are infinitely more expensive than just plain old razors are, meaning that negating brings in more money and improves this area than affirming does. His response is that he just wants to make the best razors known to man, but a) no one would ever do this. It would be really expensive to do, and then when everyone has used the razor and all the beards are gone, no one will need the razor anymore. There wouldn't be a market for the razor. But b) I'm saying the same thing about beard styling kits. I want to make the best beard styling kits out there. They'll sell infinitiely better, as well. If I'm just styling my beard and not getting rid of it entirely, then I'll always need a styling kit, meaning that they'll keep selling. This means I'll be making infinitely more money than Pro.

Ease of Use:

Extend my argument that not shaving the beard will always be infinitely easier to do than to shave the beard. This turns his ease of shaving when if ease is what we're looking for, then I'm always going to be easier. He drops this argument entirely. Don't let him respond to it in the last round.


Extend my response that I have the ability to fundraise too. He just says that his is better due to it helping people learn things, but mine is able to do that as well. I help people learn about different ways to maintain their bada** beards, so I link into learning as well. There's no way that we differ here.


Extend my argument that by denying people who are able to grow beards the right to, he's enabling more suffering within the world, meaning that his attempts to minimize it fail. We should view beards as a gift rather than as something to hate and oppress. He says that beards killed his family, so I'll never be able to understand the suffering he's been through. But while that may be true (I'm not sure it is with him not providing any way to verify it), I know for sure that beards are a gift when beards saved my entire town from annihilation. Hundreds of families now live due to beards. This shows that they stop more suffering than they may bring about, meaning they're a net good for humanity to have.

Resolutional Text:

He's being unfair here. All of his arguments have to do with shaving beards and then he's trying to use the wording of the resolution being about getting banned from DDO against me when I make my arguments about shaving beards. Don't vote me down for this, I'm just responding to his arguments with my own refutations.

But moreover, there's no reason to believe that hair should fall off in a stable environment. Not only that, but this presumes that hair from our beards should fall off to begin with, and that assumes that the resolution is true to begin with and we're still debating the resolution.

Finishing The Round:

I've responded and made offensive turns to all of his arguments. He has no way to gain offense in this round while all the arguments he makes either don't generate anyone offense or work in my favor. Not only that, but I've kept up with all of his rules, so I deserve to win the debate.

Debate Round No. 3


I was too busy to start this debate, and it was a bad move on my part. I don't have enough time to post an argument for this round, so I forfeit.

Sorry for the inconvenience.


Send toast to ten tense stout saints' ten tall tents.

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Ninjahammer 2 years ago
I have infinite respect for con.
Posted by DATXDUDE 2 years ago
Con says "vote Pro". I welcome you to do so, even though I forfeited.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff the debate in the last round.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The text of Pro"s final round makes it difficult to determine precisely what he meant, particularly because he does use the term "forfeit" rather than "concede", and in the DDO context, this could apply to either the round or the debate as a whole. Considering the context of the forfeit, which expresses an apology for the entire debate and which talks about this round in particular, I leave it up to the voters to decide whether or not this should be treated as a single round forfeit or a concession of the debate.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
My mistake, guys. I thought dsjpk5 meant a forfeited round and not a concession. He can re-post his RFD any time.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: dsjpk5// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff the debate in the last round.

[*Reason for removal*] While a forfeit is sufficient reason to award a conduct point, it is insufficient in and of itself to justify an arguments vote.
Posted by Sciguy 2 years ago
Ooh, that's good.
Posted by Zaradi 2 years ago
Rule is that I'm unable to use it. Not him.
Posted by Sciguy 2 years ago
VOTERS do note that Pro has already broken the rules and has used the letter "C". ALL points are here by awarded to the Con in this debate.
Posted by Lee001 2 years ago
damn you Zaradi -.-
Posted by Lee001 2 years ago
Why u h8 me?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
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: Pro conceded the debate in the final round.