The Instigator
Dik_Dawg
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DakotaKrafick
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Dating

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
DakotaKrafick
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,577 times Debate No: 22904
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Dik_Dawg

Pro

I am a 24 y/o white woman in the USA and I am interested in finding a male partner of a similar age who is both intelligent and funny. Will anyone accept?
(I know I am going to get several people saying this should be on a forum but I have my reasons)
DakotaKrafick

Con

I assume the entire first sentence of your instigation is the resolution, which should be easy enough to prove false or at least to cast reasonable doubt on.

My opponent says this: "I am a 24 y/o white woman in the USA and I am interested in finding a male partner of a similar age who is both intelligent and funny." But much about this contradicts her profile, just look for yourself!

1. It says she's 100-years-old.
2. It says she's interested in women (not men).

And there, the resolution has been refuted in two different ways.
Debate Round No. 1
Dik_Dawg

Pro

I did not initially want to display my personal information online. And can you blame me? With weird creepers like you online... What am I supposed to do?
Just because my 4 y/o son has a bigger willy than you...
DakotaKrafick

Con

If we can't trust her own profile information, then I doubt we can trust what she said in her instigation either. It is still reasonable to not believe the resolution is true, unless my opponent can prove otherwise.
Debate Round No. 2
Dik_Dawg

Pro

Con has judges me in a way that is unjustified. I did not initially wish to release my personal information until I had explores the online community. This is in the majority of cases a fair action to take.
My opponent has no real argument, apart from a fragile hope that my fellow DDO members will agree with what he finds to be "reasonable".
The Merrium-Webster Defines reasonable as "not extreme or excessive".
http://i.word.com...
I take it that pro wants to beleive my profile information. He believes that I am a one hundred year old lesbian woman, who is muslim(shite), yet white in ethnicity. He believes I am retired despite actually not being 24 years of age. And hypothetically, of we trusted my profile, despite being retired I would still earn an extremely healthy $150000 plus. Also, on top of all this I my activities would be"drinking, driving, listening to JB, Nicki Minaj and other classics". Totally legit with no trolling there.
Under websites I claim that I made google. This does certainly not match up with my other information.
Did I also mention that my profile says I live in Kandi, Benin. The number of computer users in that region is very low. Especially for someone that had personal information like my profile describes.
What I am trying to get at, my good people, is that the probability is so low for someone to have all this personal information are infinitesimal.
And despite this my opponent seems surprised when I let him know that this information is false! That leads him to beleive that since I was lying then, I must be lying now. Is that not going to extremes?
And wait! What was the definition of reasonable again? Not extreme or excessive. Therefore my opponent is not being reasonable with his judgement, meaning his entire single argument is invalid! Through the power of simple logic we have blown apart my opponents only argument. What do you think he will do now, good people?
Here is a link to my profile if you want to make sure this is legit.
http://www.debate.org...
DakotaKrafick

Con

Good job; you proved the information depicted in your profile is probably false. Yet you've done nothing at all to prove that the information in the resolution is probably true. The only evidence we have to go on is that you've lied about your personal information before; that's it, nothing else.
Debate Round No. 3
Dik_Dawg

Pro

The purpose of what I did in round 3 was to rebut your only argument which says due to the fact I have lied in the past I regularly lie. Despite my given reasons my opponent simply does not want to hear it, and does not show any evidence of any other lies, justified or otherwise.
The way that the resolution is proved is by my statement. This is the truth, and I am willing to swear to god or federal court or JB or whoever you want. I would know myself, my personal details, better than my opponent would I not? My opponent has also not introduced any evidence of me having personal information other than what I have stated.
I am not sure if my opponent missed this or something but I will emphasize this yet again. I have justified my false personal information for DDO, and it does not mean I am a frequent lier, as con seems to assume. My opponent has no evidence of me having other personal information that does notatch my statement. Ultimately, my opponent has had no arguments I have not adressed.
DakotaKrafick

Con

I'm not sure my opponent understands how the burden of proof works so I'll spell it out: you are the one who is affirming the resolution, Dik, so you have to prove what you say is true. Please prove that you are a 24-year-old white woman who is interested in dating a funny, intelligent man of similar age.

If you can't prove that what you're saying is true, then you lose this debate. Waste another round like you've been doing and the win will surely go to me.
Debate Round No. 4
Dik_Dawg

Pro

You too have the burden of proof in this debate.
I have given my word, and dispelled the likelihood of me lying by doing so. I can't beleive my opponent just wants to troll. I don't know if he is just trying to get an easy win but he hasn't really presented any arguements. The burden of proof is on you my good fellow.
What I expect my opponents response to be:
Pro is a troll. He has the burden of proof not me because I am lazy. Hurr dure.
My opponent can not present new arguements in conclusion, so therefoe I win.
I hope everyone has enjoyed this debate.
DakotaKrafick

Con

My opponent has utterly failed to meet his/her burden of proof. If you, the voters, feel I have too, then by all means, tie our arguments. But I think it's pretty clear who should at least get the conduct point.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by warpedfx 4 years ago
warpedfx
Dik_DawgDakotaKrafickTied
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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: this was an utter farce of a debate... dik_dawg has not demonstrated his or her case when once revealed to have been dishonest in his/her profile... easy win for DakotaKrafick
Vote Placed by Contra 4 years ago
Contra
Dik_DawgDakotaKrafickTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO did not meet her BoP. CON did meet his BoP
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
Dik_DawgDakotaKrafickTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: spamming debates is frowned upon....