The Instigator
dannyking
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points
The Contender
asiansarentnerdy
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Debating online is the best way to debate. There are no restrictions or barriers to opinion forming.

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  
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: 4/2/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,403 times Debate No: 7649
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

dannyking

Pro

Debating online offers many advantages over debating offline (be it in a group or one-to-one). To keep this concise I will bullet point my arguments:

Online debate allows you to:

* Take time to think about your arguments and examples before you contribute them
* Take time to find evidence to back your arguments up.
* Keep track of what has been said and by whom. (So that contradictions can more easily be spotted in the future)
* Get away from stereotyping which is never useful in a debate
* Make your points of view anonymously if you wish therefore really argue your points of view, rather than those that you deem socially acceptable. Anonymity is always useful for debating.
* Not lose focus over things like tone of voice, facial expression, etc.
* People can not interrupt you whilst you are making your points.

Online group discussion/debate/forum sites (unlike debate.com) also offer the following advantage:
* Anyone can contribute their opinion at any time in the future and therefore improve the balance of the debate/discussion whereas in person you're limited to the views of the people in the room at the time

I look forward to discussing these points with you and wish you the best of luck. Thanks!
asiansarentnerdy

Con

First of all, I would like to thank my opponent for starting this debate.

Debate was created so that people could argue over their points verbally. If you debate online, the "thinking on your feet" factor is eliminated. For most debaters, this is the best part of debating; having to think quick on your feet and respond quickly to your opponent's attacks. Debating online makes no need to do this, and therefore most of the fun of an actual "live" debate is taken away.

1)Taking time to think your arguments and examples through; find evidence. While it is true that you have a lot of extra time to think through your cases before submitting them, in an actual debate, you should already know every single aspect of your debate. Therefore, in most debates, all this extra evidence is unneeded.
2)Keep track of what has been said and by whom. This is what note-taking/flowing is for in a debate.
3)Not lose focus over things like tone of voice, facial expression, etc. In my personal opinion, this is the best part of most debates. Looking your opponent in the eye and making your point clear. Seeing their facial expression when they are wrong. A face-to-face debate, filled with all this emotion, is what makes live debates WAY more interesting and meaningful to do.
4)People cannot interrupt you whilst you are making your points. I don't know if this applies to audience or opponent, but in any debate, it is proper etiquette and politeness to not interrupt whilst people are in the middle of a debate. If you are regarding the opponent, if it is during a time such as your cross-examination, then you have the right to tell your opponent to stop interrupting. Additionally, if your opponent interrupts, they get points deducted for etiquette. (or so I think)

My main point of contention is that in online debates, you lose the "fun factor."

So, for all the reasons above, live debates are more interesting and fun, and those factors that my opponent has made are not valid and do not apply to live debates.
Debate Round No. 1
dannyking

Pro

I would like to start by thanking my opponent for joining this debate and for her contributions so far.

I would also like to define what I mean by online debate & discussion in this case: I mean to argue that online debate is a more powerful platform for those debating with the intent on better understanding a topic, discovering and understanding the different points of view and coming to some conclusion which can be used for future action rather than debating as a sport. Whilst debating as a sport is very useful and indeed fun as my opponent points out, debating with the intent of coming to a conclusion for future action is what I should have said in round one.

In this case, it is important that people do not think on their feet but rather fully consider their arguments because in this context the aim of the debate is to decide on a suitable outcome or fully understand an issue rather than win or lose. The time-delay of the Internet makes this easier as it removes the feeling of having to reply quickly.

The Internet also makes it easier to remove the emotion from debate which is important if you are debating a sensitive issue. It may be more thrilling in person but this is not the objective I had in mind.

So my main point of contention is that you don't want the 'fun factor' - and as you stated, online debates can remove this.

I apologise for not having made myself clearer in the first round. I recognise that my opponent's points in round 1 are and excellent and valid but in the wrong context due to my error.
asiansarentnerdy

Con

Oh. Well, the point of any debate, obviously, is to come to an end/conclusion. And no matter what the way it is reached, what does it matter as long as the final conclusion is reached? Why not choose the more fun way to reach that end? Even my opponent agrees that "live debates" are more fun, and since all debates must end with a final solution, no matter live or online, it would be more fun to reach that end with a more fun way.

Also, if online debates were thought out more carefully and precisely then live debates, you can see there is still the same margin for error, the example being the mistake my opponent made in his statements. And in reference to online debates removing the "emotion", if a debate resolution angers you or you are offended by it, those emotions aren't going to change just because you are not debating face to face. You can't get rid of the emotion, and the emotion will evidently be clear even in your online debate rounds.
Debate Round No. 2
dannyking

Pro

dannyking forfeited this round.
asiansarentnerdy

Con

My points still remain standing because my oppenent has forfeited the round. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
dannyking

Pro

dannyking forfeited this round.
asiansarentnerdy

Con

*sigh* Another forfeit. Oh well. Again, my points still stand because my opponenet has yet again forfeited the round.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by PoeJoe 7 years ago
PoeJoe
+ Conduct goes to CON for not forfeiting rounds.

+ English is a tie. There were minor fumbles on both sides -- nothing substantial, though.

+ Argument goes to CON. PRO changed the resolution in the middle of the debate, which isn't fair. But even in doing so, CON /still/ addressed PRO's argument, as well as present her own. PRO never addressed CON's argument. Further, the resolution says nothing of whether or not Internet debating arrives at factual conclusions better. CON was only right in her non-abusive interpretation of it.

+ Sources is a tie. No sources provided on either side.
Posted by asiansarentnerdy 7 years ago
asiansarentnerdy
Aren't you supporting the same thing I was negating? if that makes any sense...
Posted by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
Online debate offers no interaction between competitors. You are not forced to think on the spot, one of the key aspects of debate. Sometimes it is hard to convey information unless you are able to talk to the person directly. Disagree with me? Call me and we'll debate :)
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 7 years ago
PoeJoe
dannykingasiansarentnerdyTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by porkbunlover 7 years ago
porkbunlover
dannykingasiansarentnerdyTied
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 PervRat 7 years ago
PervRat
dannykingasiansarentnerdyTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
dannykingasiansarentnerdyTied
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