The Instigator
nickjno1fan
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
rougeagent21
Pro (for)
Winning
35 Points

As the old cliche goes ,"There's no harm in trying"

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/11/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,088 times Debate No: 8586
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (5)

 

nickjno1fan

Con

This house believes that this statement is hypothetically UNREAL. In decision making for example. The reason we decide carefully is to prevent mistakes from happening, thus causing harm to our lives. That's all.
I'd like to say good luck to my debator. Another question: do I win if I dont have a debator? O.o
rougeagent21

Pro

Hypothetically unreal?
Well, yes, that is the definition...

When one looks deeper into the resolution, one sees that another will or will not "try." We are debating if trying will produce harm. For the sake of the debate, lets assume that I am trying to win a trip to the next Superbowl. To win the trip, I have to guess a number between one and one hundred. If I guess the correct number, I win the trip.

I go online to the sweepstakes website. The option shows up to guess a number. Do i guess? Will it cause me harm if I do?

The choice seems rather obvious. I have nothing to lose, and quite a bit to gain. Since there is no harm, the resolution is affirmed.
Debate Round No. 1
nickjno1fan

Con

"To win the trip, I have to guess a number between one and one hundred. If I guess the correct number, I win the trip. I go online to the sweepstakes website. The option shows up to guess a number. Do i guess? Will it cause me harm if I do?"
Now everyone knows that this is very unlikely in the real world. Chances are, nobody would be able to guess the number right unless the sweepstakes staff gets some benefit from you.
If they dont, there must be a catch.
Besides, the probability of winning is only 1 out of a hundred. If everybody knew of this website, anybody could have joined. There will a number of repetitive answers with a number of contestants. I doubt that the sweepstakes office would be generous enough(or rich enough) to reward all those who answered correctly. Clearly, there's no reason for this intent.

"I have nothing to lose, and quite a bit to gain."
Oops, thinks again.
You wasted your time on that piece of junk.haha.
rougeagent21

Pro

This is turning out to be more of an argument than a debate. Anyways, I will try to continue.

As you are the instigator, traditionally, the burden of proof falls on you. After contesting my arguments, provide some of your own.

My opponent makes a few rather weak attacks on my example. They are as follows:
1- The example is unrealistic
2- " Oops, thinks again.
You wasted your time on that piece of junk.haha."

First of all, this was after all just an example. Examples are not supposed to be 100% realistic. If my opponent still wants a real-world situation, here is one. This is for an NFL contest where you enter your dad to win NFL gear.

http://www.nflshop.com...
http://www.nflshop.com...

Once again, you have everything to win, with nothing to lose. On to the second point of contention.

"'I have nothing to lose, and quite a bit to gain.'
Oops, thinks again."

You have not said anything by this statement. If I need to "think again" then tell me what about! You cannot debate by making vague assertions.

As of now, my opponent has yet to make any arguments, and can only try to attack mine. I still stand in firm affirmation of the resolution. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
nickjno1fan

Con

My opponent asked for some arguments, and here they are:
Believe it or not, we are always a risk in everything we take part in. I'll be using some of my opponents arguments as an example.
"This is for an NFL contest where you enter your dad to win NFL gear.
http://www.nflshop.com...;

Risks:
-Firstly, your computer. You click on the Internet Explorer icon and BOOM! What have you got? A number of enticing ads and pop up banners saying, "You've won !! Click here to claim!!" Now this might be what you call, PURE LUCK. But as we know, these things arent as harmless as we think. Behind some of these ads are the latest hackers and trojan viruses which most anti-viruses dont recognize. Even if you had an Anti-virus/Firewall/Malware protection, you can never be 100% sure that your PC is protected. So how is this related to your example? Easy. You've just made yourself available to unknown hackers by logging on to the internet for this website.

Sources: Hacking for Dummies
"Browsing to an innocent (and trusted) website can completely compromise
your computer, allowing a hacker to read your sensitive files or
worse delete them." - Hacking for dummies
"Firewalls, encryption, and virtual private networks (VPNs) can create a false
feeling of safety. These security systems often focus on high-level vulnerabilities,
such as viruses and traffic through a firewall, without affecting how hackers
work."-Hacking for dummies

-Lastly, yourself. You had to give out some personal information in order to log in. Should you think of giving false info, then that'll be the last of it, it will be impossible for you to win. Freely giving out your personal info could lead you into serious damage--it could be the worse than we could imagine.

Like I said, there's always a risk in everything we do, and risk, of course, is always HARMFUL. Thus, there IS harm in trying. Thank you very much.

"If I need to "think again" then tell me what about!"
Dont you get it? I was telling you to think about what you've lost.

Hey, Is this proof enough? ^_^
rougeagent21

Pro

I will not argue the same points over again, as I feel we have had enough of that. I am going to keep the round brief, and to-the-point.

My opponent offers several risks of the site. I believe my opponent did not actually go to my source since he is conjuring up false risks. I actually completed the offer to test it, and would encourage my opponent to do the same. His first false risk is the virus risk.

This argument is what you would call a non-unique argument. This "risk" (although drastically reduced on trusted sites) is not only available through this site, but throughout the internet. What you must realize here though is that my site is very trustworthy, and has constant inspections going on to ensure this is maintained. Although I personally cannot prove that there are no risks, it is an extremely low chance that there would even be a risk. Given this, there would be no harm for the vast majority, if not all of the people that use the site. Even so, the argument is non-unique.

His second argument is basically the same as his first. Viruses steal information and give the computer instructions. Giving out information is almost the same thing. It CAN cause trouble but certainly not on this site. It is sponsored by Google, and is constantly scanned for complete protection. The only reason information is needed is to ship prizes. Once again, I have tested this myself. I have received one conformation e-mail, but no spam whatsoever. The site is tested and secure.

My opponent's last assertion is completely false. He claims "there's always a risk in everything we do, and risk, of course, is always HARMFUL." This is an oxymoron. The word risk implies that something COULD be lost, or something COULD be gained. My opponent falsely links risk with harm, which is not in the resolution. We are debating about harm, not risk. On Deal or No Deal, people RISK some money to GAIN more money. They are not harmed by earning less money than they could have, but they are RISKING some money. Basically, risk does not equal harm, as my opponent would have you believe.

"Dont you get it? I was telling you to think about what you've lost."
I have lost nothing. I have not lost security, identity, or compromised my computer. Contrary to my opponent's assertions, I remain unharmed. As so, I have proven there to be no harm for my efforts. The resolution is affirmed. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Scyrone 7 years ago
Scyrone
I think I might be able to beat you after I come back from school. It actually looks fairly easy if you read his argument correctly.
Posted by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Easy win for Pro. Not worth the time and effort.
Posted by FlashFire 7 years ago
FlashFire
No, he's just saying that you're looking for an easy win.
Posted by nickjno1fan 7 years ago
nickjno1fan
I see.. you're not calling me dumb are you?? O.o
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
"Another question: do I win if I dont have a debator?"
No. It means that everybody was too smart to accept a debate that's impossible to win.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by TFranklin62 7 years ago
TFranklin62
nickjno1fanrougeagent21Tied
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 Clockwork 7 years ago
Clockwork
nickjno1fanrougeagent21Tied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Brock_Meyer 7 years ago
Brock_Meyer
nickjno1fanrougeagent21Tied
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 Scyrone 7 years ago
Scyrone
nickjno1fanrougeagent21Tied
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 rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
nickjno1fanrougeagent21Tied
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