The Instigator
Logical-Master
Pro (for)
Winning
43 Points
The Contender
bsufan101
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Dance Dance Revolution ought to be included in High-School . . .

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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: 8/11/2009 Category: Health
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,151 times Debate No: 9200
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (13)
Votes (8)

 

Logical-Master

Pro

FULL TOPIC: Dance Dance Revolution ought to be included in High-School and/or Middle School Physical Education classes for schools that can afford it.

I am in favor of this suggestion. I fully uphold the notion that DDR ought to be included and invite anyone who wishes to argue in favor of the topic. Like my most recent debate challenge, I shall begin argumentation in the second round and shall merely let this round serve as the greeting round. PRO is more than free to follow suit and begin argumentation in the second round

Furthermore, I believe the topic is quite clear in it's meaning and reserve the right to challenge any interpretation of the topic which my opponent may have that differs from my own.

PS: For those who wish for further clarification on the topic, I shall more than gladly be of assistance in the comment section.
bsufan101

Con

I will accept the challenge set forth by the PRO.

Thank you first off for setting up this debate round.

However the first thing that I will do is clarify one thing. That one thing is that I am to take the position of CON. It seemed that the PRO was trying to argue the CON when he was posted as the PRO. As per the postings in the comments it seems that the poster might have meant to be CON, but I will hold him to his statement:
" I am in favor of this suggestion. I fully uphold the notion that DDR ought to be included"

Again my argument is that DDR SHOULD NOT be included.
Debate Round No. 1
Logical-Master

Pro

Many greetings to my opponent; I thank him for accepting this debate and wish him the best of luck. With that said, let us proceed.

>>>>CONTENTION #1: Child Obesity has been a problem in terms of economics and health.

First, I would like you the take a gander at the following information presented from the official statistics concerning childhood obesity: "According to research, childhood and teenage obesity has increased by four times over the past 40 years. Childhood obesity statistics also indicate that over 70 percent of overweight adolescents will be overweight or obese as adults." (1)

Second, I would like you to take a gander at the following quote gathered from a study in Appalachian communities: "In one study of children in Appalachian communities, 2 out of every 3 children were considered either overweight or obese." (3)

Third, I would like you to observe the following information gathered from "Health in the Balance, 2005, Institute of Medicine" : "Economic Costs - In the twenty years from 1979-1991 the hospital costs for children and youth have risen from 35 million in 1979-1981 to 127 million from 1997-1991 (Preventing childhood Obesity: Health in the Balance, 2005, Institute of Medicine)." (2)

So, from these three pieces of information, we know that not only are MANY of our children (our country's/world's future) SUFFERING daily, but that this obesity is a SERIOUS economic problem as well (and given how bad the US economy is right about now, we certainly need to lose as much "weight" [pun not intended] as possible). From this, we gather that SOMETHING should be done about the common obesity problem.

>>>>CONTENTION #2: DDR is an effective means of getting people to lose weight.

Observe the fourth link (4). The main idea we can gather from his evidence is that DDR can serve as a weight losing process that is fun and highly addictive. What's even more interesting is the fact that players who weigh over 300 pounds can get into it and willingly play the game enough to get in shape. This is hardly ever the case for games such as dodge ball or activities like jogging.

As Gail Woodward-Lopez, associate director of the UC Berkeley Center for Weight and Health has suggested, if DDR is implemented alongside the traditional PE methods, it has a great chance of motivating children to be in shape (3)

>>>>CONTENTION #3: DDR improves foot-eye coordination, danc/ rhythmic skills, and gives students the incentive to be more active in PE.

1) The very nature of playing Dance Dance Revolution can serve to increase one's foot-eye coordination skills (8). Such skills can be especially useful when driving a car or any other kind of a vehicle which requires the use of ones eyes and feet simultaneously (7). In fact, with improved foot-eye coordination abilities, we could even go so far as to say that the rate of car accidents could lower. Nevertheless, a good deal all the way around.

2) DDR can also help students improve their since of rhythm, hence allow them better "dancing to music" potent. Lets face it: there will probably come in time in their life when this skill will pay off. When you're in a club, you most certainly don't wanna make the mistake of looking like an idiot when you're dancing as it's assured that mostly everyone else will laugh at you. For guys in particular, having a good sense of rhythm when it comes to dancing may just be the ticket to getting some action if you catch my drift.

In addition, studies indicate that Intelligence And Rhythmic Accuracy correlate with each other directly (4, 5). Given that rhythmic accuracy is just what DDR can improve, one could say that DDR can actually serve as a means of expanding ones intellectual capabilities. Given how low the US ranks in education at the moment when compared to other countries (6), going about the route of implementing DDR in schools would be beneficial overall.

3) Finally, DDR would serve as a means of making more students in PE have the desire to participate. We must keep in the popularity of video games as well as the impact they have on our culture and way of life. Since DDR is a video game (a VERY popular one at that), interest and participation in physical education would increase, thus allowing students to benefit from the class more so than they currently do.

Thus, for the reasons presented, I hold that DDR should be implemented in schools that can afford it.

And that'll do it for now. I now stand ready for my opponent's counter speech.

SOURCES:

(1): http://weight-loss.emedtv.com...
(2): http://www.debate.org...
(3): http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu...
(4): http://www.sciencedaily.com...
(5): http://faculty.washington.edu...
(6): http://www.upi.com...
(7): http://www.itftennis.com...
(8): http://www.articlesbase.com...
bsufan101

Con

I would first like to thank the PRO for making this debate possible.

I will not refute the evidence that was given stating that our nation is in trouble with obesity causing havoc in our youth, that is a proven fact for many years. Also yes there is an advantage to paying DDR. However I want to start by saying that by playing DDR you will no improve your car driving skills that is a slippery slope fallacy and you need to drop this argument from the round. One does not contribute to the other.

Also we are not debating if it will improve there dancing ability. Dealing with obesity is what we are trying to fix not the fact that a lot of kids can not dance.

According to CNN.com (http://www.cbsnews.com...) it will take $8,000 for each machine. Even in my opponents own speech he said that obesity is an economical problem. Schools do not have the money to be buying $8,000 machines. Even the less pricey models will still run a few hundred dollars. You need the T.V, the game system, the game, the pad.
That adds up to a lot of money that we as a nation can not afford.

In an answer to the high cost of the DDR machine is to get the children into Wii sports. For the $8,000 spent on one DDR machine you could purchase 16 Wii machines along with a T.V to use the system on. I am using prices from Best Buy.com. The Wii comes with an activity game, so you would not be required to purchase a game unlike the DDR alternative.

Also by purchasing Wii's you can play multi player games getting more kids involved.

Also they still would be loosing calories and have more of a selection to play, so the appeal for kids to exercise would still exist.
Debate Round No. 2
Logical-Master

Pro

>>>>CONTENTION #1: Child Obesity has been a problem in terms of economics and health.<<<<<<<<<<<

CON agrees that Child Obesity has in fact been a problem in terms of economics and health. Having done this, we can conclude that there is a good incentive to increase the overall effectiveness of exercise for students

>>>>CONTENTION #2: DDR is an effective means of getting people to lose weight.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Yet again, CON is shown agreeing with my position; based on his claim that "there is an advantage to playing DDR", it's clear he believes that it can seriously contribute to countering the obesity problem in the US.

>>>>CONTENTION #3: DDR improves foot-eye coordination, danc/ rhythmic skills, and gives students the incentive to be more active in PE.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

1) CON claims that my assertion about DDR improving one's car driving skills is not true and is a slippery slope fallacy. He further claims that I should drop this argument from the round. I shall do no such thing, granted that I provided solid evidence to back up my assertion. It is fact that DDR can really increase one's foot-eye coordination abilities and it is a fact that good foot eye coordination abilities can improve driving skills (obviously pedal/brake/eye synchronization). Both facts supported by my sources. If my opponent has no interest in contesting this claim, then it ought to go down as being conceded to.

2) CON claims that you should dismiss my points about DDR serving to improve rhymatic abilities (incidentally, he fails to point out the fact that I claimed this would serve to increase academic performance as well) as they are irrelevant to this debate. On the contrary, my arguments are well within the scope of the topic. First, I went about showing that there was a longstanding problem within our country that DDR could solve. Second, I went about showing that there are many additional benefits to having DDR in schools. All of this is to favor the notion that DDR ought to be in middle schools and/or high school PE classes . So no, it isn't about dealing with obesity, but about improving in other areas as well.

3) Note that CON concedes to all the benefits which I've provided in not having responded to them.

==============================
CON's case: DDR cost too much money. |
==============================

1) My opponent's whole case is irrelevant. The full resolution includes the clause "for schools that can afford it." I specifically added this clause so that the debate wouldn't be focused on the matter of financing the project.

2) To pacify my opponent, his case is still in error. If you'll note his position, after claiming that DDR machines would be too expensive, he points out that purchasing Nintendo Wii' would be far less expensive, just as appealing and just as healthy for the kids. I ask that you all direct your attention the following link: http://www.amazon.com...

Indeed, it turns out that there is actually a version of the game on the Wii. In fact, there is a version of the game on all of the current consoles. Thus, even going by my opponent's alternative, I'd proposed that students not only have the option of playing Wii sports, but DDR as well.

And that'll do it for now.
bsufan101

Con

I would first like to point out that the only thing that I agreed to from my opponents contention 1 was that obesity was a problem. However I never said an economic problem.

Now on to the fallacy. It is n fact a slippery slope statement. By helping people cure obesity you also are claiming that it will help our nation will car crashes. That is an irrelevant connection and you have no proof in the similarity with the two. Again I ask for this to be dropped from he round. And you could even tie the being able to dance better statement into this as well.

We are debating helping obesity, NOT driving, dancing. And then I pose this question to my opponent. If playing rhythmic games help intelligence, why then has the school system done better sense Guitar Hero has been a best selling game? http://blog.nola.com....

Also in response to me arguing that DDR does help loose weight. Ya um if you didn't already here a few schools have already used the machines. Kind of hard to refute that.

On to my argument. You can not assume that a school board will purchase games from Amazon.com.
Also you are changing your entire argument mid debate.

First it is just DDR. Now DDR AND WII. So the next alternative I say are you going to add this onto your argument.
I ask my opponent to PLEASE specify what system he is trying to use in his resolution. When asking this question I would hope that he would not say Wii an if he does I hope the people reading this debate would point out that I was the one suggesting that system and by him saying Wii would destroy the integrity of this debate. I should not be penalized because my opponent did not specify his position.

With my opponent saying that it is for schools who can afford it. He did not refute the fact that the schools around our nation are going through hard economical times, so the likely hood that they could afford it slim to none. There are schools around the nation that are cutting teachers so they can afford books and supplies. As of now it is not a big interest in schools to pay hundreds of dollars for a single station to work out on. Again with my proposition for the Wii to be used. You get a free game in the system that gives the user a good workout. My opponent NEVER refuted the fact that for one DDR you can get far more Wii'. With my opponents plane you have to pay far more.
Debate Round No. 3
Logical-Master

Pro

>>>>CONTENTION #1: Child Obesity has been a problem in terms of economics and health.<<<<<<<<<<<

CON says he agreed that Child obesity but was a problem, but he never agreed it was an economic problem. I beg to differ; I argued that it was an economic problem and provided evidence to favor this claim. My opponent has yet to address my claim. In doing that, we are to see my claim as conceded to as this is the nature of debate.

>>>>CONTENTION #2: DDR is an effective means of getting people to lose weight.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

See R2.

>>>>CONTENTION #3: DDR improves foot-eye coordination, danc/ rhythmic skills, and gives students the incentive to be more active in PE.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

1) By saying 'By helping people cure obesity you also are claiming that it will help our nation will car crashes.", my opponent is utilizing the straw man fallacy. At NO point have I claimed that curing obesity correlated with lowering car accidents. My argument was that improving foot eye coordination (one of the skills necessary to prevent car accidents and drive well) would lower the amount of car accidents. This is a direct connection, hence my opponent claim to the contrary is to be dismissed without any hesitation.

2) Once again, my case was formulated to show that DDR was vastly beneficial rather than to merely insist that it helps combat obesity. Nowhere in the topic title is obesity mentioned, thus this debate isn't really about obesity, but whether or not DDR should be introduced to schools.

>>>>>>>>>>>>RE: CON's question: If playing rhythmic games can help improve intelligence, why has the school system done better sense Guitar Hero has been best selling game?

In response, I think my opponent has answered his own question. I don't know what evidence there is to support that schools have shown improvements in direct correlation to Guitar Hero's success, but I shall gladly concede to the idea insinuated in the question as it helps supports my case.

==============================
CON's case: DDR cost too much money. |
==============================

1) In attempt to defend the notion that finances are relevant to the debate, CON points out that schools around our nation are going through hard economical times.

A) CON is assuming that EVERY SINGLE school cannot possibly afford DDR no matter what strategy is induced to keep the costs as low as possible. Not to mention that he doesn't bother to provide us with solid evidence indicating that no school will be able to manage.

B) He is ignoring the actual topic as there is no place in the topic that mentions WHEN DDR would be implemented in schools. It could very well be when the economy is in a superior state

C) Observe the following piece of evidence: http://www.nytimes.com...

"As a result of a partnership among West Virginia's Department of Education, its Public Employees Insurance Agency and West Virginia University, the state has committed to installing the game in all 765 of its public schools by next year. Almost all of its 185 middle schools already use it." (1)

This article was documented during the year 2007 (a time at which the economy was no better off, perhaps even less than it is now). In fact, there are current plans for there to be over 1500 DDR programs in schools merely by the end of THIS decade. Clearly, the state of the economy is by no means hampering DDR. Not to mention that one cannot help but favor its benefits; it is well worth the cost.

D)For all intensive purposes, this debate is not about the pricing on DDR. Heck, even if NO school could afford it, the resolution would be legitimate as we are discussing whether or not DDR is worth having if funding isn't a problem. This would be no different than me challenging my opponent to debate about whether it not it would be worth it to purchase the local gas station IF he happened to have 10 million dollars in his bank account.

2a) As for the arguments I pacified CON on, he points out that I cannot assume that a school board will purchase games from Amazon.com I agree with him. I cannot assume this. School boards could purchase games from any place of their choosing within the same price range. The purpose of me citing Amazon.com was simply to establish that DDR was inexpensive and also a console game.

2b) Next, CON accuses me of changing my entire argument mid debate. He bases this on me arguing that schools could very well have DDR and Wii sports (one game which comes with a nintendo Wii free of charge). However, my goal is merely to defend the idea that DDR should be implemented in schools. I see no reason as to why both Wii sports and DDR could be implemented. This is not changing my argument, but rather showing that CON's argument is ineffective in that it doesn't provide us reason to dismiss DDR from consideration.

2c) CON suggest that I specify what system I am using for the resolution. I will do no such thing as this is about as relevant as asking a math teacher what color a bus is in a math problem revolving around what time a bus would reach it's location while moving at 30 mph.

As for him being the one to suggest that the Wii system be used, I notice that. All the same, this doesn't hamper my position at all when considering that DDR is easily purchasable on the Wii. CON may have suggested the Wii (and I'm not sure where he is getting the idea that I am trying to take this away from him), but my suggestion is that his suggestion doesn't help his case.

2d) finally, if you'll take the time to observe the quote below, you'll notice how easily schools are able to spend from $70 - $800 for each DDR system. Nowhere in the article has this been suggested as problem, not to mention that the number of schools relying on this formula is only increasing

"A basic D.D.R. system, including a television and game console, can be had for less than $500, but most schools that use the game choose to spend from $70 to $800 each for more robust mats, rather than rip apart the relatively flimsy versions meant for home use"

2e) DDR is actually a full game in comparison to Wii sports, has had years to demonstrate reliability of my claims statistically and gives students an extra option. Not to mention that the above quote indicates that the purchase of dDr and a Wii wouldn't be a problem.

==============
WHY TO VOTE PRO |
==============

1) CON conceded to most of the benefits I provided for DDR (academic improvement and lowering of obesity are the most crucially damaging to his position). The only benefit he attempted to attack resulted in failure as it relied on him resorting to a straw man argument in attempt to crumple my position.

2) CONs defense solely revolves around how DDR would be financed. Merely through reading the topic, you'll note that such an argument was not intended to be a part of this debate (i.e. 'for schools that afford it'). He tried to defend his irrelevant position, but I pointed out that his defense made several assumptions about the resolution and schools in general. Furthermore, schools have demonstrated themselves as being quite capable of coping with financially supporting DDR even in the current state of the economy. In addition, even if all of this were not true, the fact of the matter is that his position is the equivalent to arguing that he wouldn't be able to afford purchasing gas station in a debate that specifically claimed he had 10,000,000 dollars.

3) In spite of CON's irrelevant case, I pacified his case by demonstrating how his position was STILL faulty. Specifically, DDR could be purchased for the Wii quite easily, hence making both DDR and Wii sports as optional in PE classes.

Thus, for all intensive purposes, I ask that you vote PRO.

Thanks for the debate. :D

EDIT: If CON introduces any new arguments, dismiss them without any hesitation.
bsufan101

Con

Well I have to say this was a fun debate.

My notion with saying my opponent was using a slippery slope was based not on that he said that curing obesity would improve driving. I am saying that it is something that can not be looked at because there is really no evidence showing that having a person play a video game will help them to drive better. That i not the reason for people getting into car accidents. It is the driving environment they are in. Like people in the car, playing with a cell pone, messing with a cd.And no this is not a new argument I am simple emphasizing the point.

Next the PRO said that Wii sports was not a full on game. Yes it is. You can change up your activity, and by sing they both can be used is not true. With DDR you will end up spending more money to get the game and equipment. Also by his own article it said they did not use the "For home" equipment. That is the Wii equipment he is saying they should use.

It is obvious that my opponent does not know the things he would need to use to get his program started. Also he has the burden to say the time in which his plan will be implemented. Also unless it is defined it is to be assumed it will occur NOW. As in the rules of inter collegiate debate. I has been on a nationally recognized team for two years now. My opponent is trying to shift t responsibilities of this debate round and that can not stand.
Debate Round No. 4
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
EDIT:

"Also he has the burden to say the time in which his plan will be implemented. "

Why?
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
DON'T TAKE WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN JUDGING:

"It is obvious that my opponent does not know the things he would need to use to get his program started."

I don't need to know. There is already a successful formula (as confirmed by my evidence)

"Also he has the burden to say the time in which his plan will be implemented. "

"I has been on a nationally recognized team for two years now. "

Once more; appeal to authority. Not to mention that I'd imagine to rules to a certain form of formal debate would hold no bearing on debating in general.

Why?

No, I do not. It is not mentioned in the resolution, therefore irrelevant. Though in spite of this, I did pacify your position and argue from the standpoint of the status quo, only to reveal that there aren't any problems with the idea of implementing DDR at the moment.

"As in the rules of inter collegiate debate."

Appeal to tradition and authority.

"My opponent is trying to shift t responsibilities of this debate round and that can not stand."

Not at all. What I am saying is that the responsibilities you accuse me of having simply don't exist.

Nevertheless, thanks for the debate. :D
Posted by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
It's already included in my middle school
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
I intend to repond some time tonight.
Posted by Miles_Finch 7 years ago
Miles_Finch
Don't Forfeit this round Logical-Master is you can help it.
Posted by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
"...for schools that can afford it."

Isn't that the best argument againt DDR in school..?
Posted by Sniperjake1994 7 years ago
Sniperjake1994
I agree with the resolution yet if DDR was somehow passed in CA, I would be pissed off because I just finished by PE credits. Oh and could you specify how long, when, etc on how DDR will be used. And just by any chance does the U.S give out vouchers and/or receive money from DDR because of this?
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
I agree with Roy. This is very strange practice.

1) There are ways around that. You could say "DDR ought to be included in middle school and/or high school" or you could have debated just one of middle school or high school.

2) How did you make the same mistake twice in a row? XD

3) Hello there.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
1) Hehe
2) Typo
3) None. The point I'm making is that I wanted to create the same feeling of formal debate where both debaters are obligated to debate against each other based on the information and knowledge which they already have. This is not usually the case on this website. Indeed, the instigator can post his first round and the potential contender can research his/her round enough to find out whether or not he/she feels comfortable enough in taking such a case on (as well as using a potentially infinite amount of time to research specific loopholes against this specific case . . .sure, one could say 7 days, but I'd just repost this debate if the time expired :D).
Posted by Rezzealaux 7 years ago
Rezzealaux
"1)Whenever I'm CON on a debate I instigate, it is to insure that I get to argue against the position I wish to argue against. Had I been PRO on "DDR ought to be included in Middle-School and High school . . .", there'd be more than one way to counter my position (such as to agree that it should be included in High school, but not middle school . . . or vice versa)."

YOU LITTLE PIECE O', DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD THAT MAKES DEBATING FOR PEOPLE LIKE ME >(

2) It's called BoP. Everyone calls it BoP.

3) And what formal debate did you do where you didn't present your case in the 1AC?
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by spinnerclotho 7 years ago
spinnerclotho
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:70 
Vote Placed by xiaopeapod 7 years ago
xiaopeapod
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by comoncents 7 years ago
comoncents
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:30 
Vote Placed by ZT 7 years ago
ZT
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Bnesiba 7 years ago
Bnesiba
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:60 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 7 years ago
s0m31john
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by bsufan101 7 years ago
bsufan101
Logical-Masterbsufan101Tied
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