Grammer iz moore impoortent then spehling.
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
Wallstreetatheist
| Started: | 7/7/2012 | Category: | Education |
| Updated: | 10 months ago | Status: | Post Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 2,013 times | Debate No: | 24617 |
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (5)
 Pro Furst rownd iz 4 akseptense ownly. Awpwnint muzt pruv spehling maters moore then grammer. Grammer shell bee dfined az: "Teh struckturl relasionchip off ah languge." Spehling shell bee dfined az: "Teh coreect hors d'oeuvre off teh leterrs n ah were'd." Maa teh besst men wen.  Con I accept this debate. I thank my opponent for already proving the Con side correct. |
 |
|
Pro Thank u four L-owing meh two dbate suhch a conterversul toppic. I wil tri two key-p meh argumants az cleer az possibl. Contension 1. Absense of grammer Thiz ez a simpull argumant. Teh absense off grammer real-E messes clareity ohver. . . .  . . . Take teh clasik exampull off "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves." . . . "A panda walks into a restaurant, sits down and orders a sandwich. After he finishes eating the sandwich, the panda pulls out a gun and shoots the waiter, and then stands up to go. "Hey!" shouts the manager. "Where are you going? You just shot my waiter and you didn't pay for your sandwich!" The panda yells back at the manager, "Hey man, I am a PANDA! Look it up!" The manager opens his dictionary and sees the following definition for panda: "A tree-dwelling marsupial of Asian origin, characterised by distinct black and white colouring. Eats shoots and leaves." . . . Bahd grammer cann real-E screw up you're day. Now, Im knot saing thaht bahd spehling cant all so bee uncleare. It cann, butt with grammer, its muhch moore impoortent . . .  . . . Contension 2. Advuhcacy A numberr off ppl agre with meh onn thiz.
.
2. Im right. Con Thanks for the debate! :D “Better to remain silent and thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” - Abe Lincoln The Informed Consensus FanStory.com’s Rules for Writing mentions 14 principles that proper writers and authors should use to write well. These are generally thought of as axioms for writers, as they were collected from voracious reading and interviews with prolific, quality writers. The 6th rule is “Spelling is more important than grammar.” [1] Professional writer Ben Needles who has written over 19,400 online articles explicates in his guide to making money writing online articles for marketing companies, “Use a spell-checker or Google Spell Checkers. Use EzineArticles spell checker. Ask a friend or relative to proof read your article. Spelling is more important than grammar.” [2] Comprehensibility The purpose of language is to communicate ideas effectively. As such, it is imperative that efficiency and cogency of our words be as good as possible. Language is a subtle and complex instrument in this regard. For example, our use of an alphabet enables the English language to have 650,000 to 750,000 words; this makes spelling very important because as a language with an extremely vast lexicon, spelling errors decrease comprehensibility, can change meaning all together, and lead to a misapprehension of a sentence. Grammar, however, can be altered without lack of comprehensibility. If I wrote, “I like too eat pizza more then broccoli,” you would be able to understand my meaning, even though I used incorrect grammar twice. Now in altering the spelling of that sentence, “Eye likez to et pizza more than brccli.” Comprehension is slowed much more. Chinese is a language where the sentence structure and grammar could be altered in any possible way without the sentence losing meaning. A scientific study has proven this point, “In the last decade, this theory has been profitably used to frame hypotheses and to design brain imaging and animal-learning experiments, mostly using the 'artificial grammar-learning' paradigm.” The study later goes on to demonstrate the artificial grammar-learning by showing that brain flexibility is able to overcome dependency of formal/standard grammar by adapting to understand new grammar (not only in language, but in the grammatical patterns of “computer programs, music, visual patterns, animal vocalizations, RNA structure and even dance.” [3] [1] http://mobile.fanstory.com... [2] http://www.articles-universe.com... [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... |
 |
|
Pro "If you are racist, I will attack you with the North."
~Abe Lincoln Disstingwished Guessts. Beeluved Call-leagues. Deerest Assocites. Meh oppoenent haz poested ah verry lahng speach ahbout teh engrish languge. Butt beecuz itt waz az boreing az crap, and filld wif collage leval mumbo-jumbo, eye fell assleep affter 7.4 secends, and woahke uhp inn ah duhmpstur. Wat uhp wif dat? . . .  . . . Annieways. Eye tink meh oppoenent haz two maine pionts (maybee tree?), sew Eye will responed two thoose write now. 1: Teh Smart Guys. Hee sayed taht FanStory.com haz 14 rulez four righting, ahnd rule numbur 6 sayz, "Spelling is more important than grammar." Eye agree. Butt wat knot manny ppl no, iz taht they're iz a seacret rule; Rule 15, witch statez, "Rule number 6 from this point forward is null, and void. Wallstreetatheist is a puppy killer, vote Pro." This iz tru storie bro. Hee allsew tahked uhbout ah mann named Bill Needles, ah name verry simler two meh owld Boy Scout leeder. . . .  . . . Annieways. I thought it waz verry lolololz taht wehn hee sayed, "Spelling is more important than grammar.", ahnd tehn wnet ahehd ahnd rote inn lowercahse, witch ment teh sentense waz rote like diz, "spelling is more important than grammar." Why wood somone putt suhch uh blatant controdiction inn taht kInd off sentense? Idk. Hee muzt be relly dum. 2: Undurstahnduhbillity. At thiz piont, eye waz knot suhre eye kould finesh teh db8. Thiz waz sew stinkin boreing. I hadent Ben tihs board cence high scholl band. . . .  . . . l'll tri two responed two hiz speach. Tri. "Grammar, however, can be altered without lack of comprehensibility." ... "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" rinng ah bell? Know? Tehn your juzt az retardedd az meh thrid sun. Shure, comprehensun cann bee slwoed wifout speeling, butt knot totelee screwed uhp like a abesense off grammer. Forget teh rezt off hiz arguement; I'll go intwo ah coma. Im preety shure no 1 understodd et anyway. I wood like two piont owt, meh orginal too contensions were untoched bye teh Con speekur. Sew SUCK IT. Spiderman iz stil dieing off cancer. Vote pro two save hiz live. Go Ron Paul. Go Jesus. Go Grammer. Con Deconstructing Opponent's Case Contension 1. Absense of grammer My opponent thinks that the absence of grammar distorts the clarity of what is intended to be conveyed. However, what he refers to with this is grammar that has deviated from standardized grammar, not an absence of grammar. As Noam Chomsky wrote in his universal grammar theory, “the process by which, in any given language, certain sentences are perceived as correct while others are not, is universal and independent of meaning.” Furthermore, “the reason that children so easily master the complex operations of language is that they have innate knowledge of certain principles that guide them in developing the grammar of their language. In other words, Chomsky’s theory is that language learning is facilitated by a predisposition that our brains have for certain structures of language.” So, in this sense, grammar is innate, universal, and independent of meaning. The only people with an absence of grammar are perhaps the severely mentally retarded and chronically ill. [1] My opponent continues on, mentioning the classical example of “Eats, Shoots, and Leaves.” This example is flawed from the start. First, even the correct interpretation in spoken form is ambiguous and grammatically incorrect according to standardized grammar, “Eats shoots and leaves.” There is no subject in the sentence. Who is doing the eating? Second, “shoots” and “leaves” could be interpreted as present-tense verbs or plural nouns. This inherent ambiguity makes this sentence an even worse example, and could be resolved by adding more detail: The panda’s diet consists of bamboo shoots and bamboo leaves. Third, the difference that changes the two aforementioned ambiguous words from nouns to verbs is the addition of two commas, which is an orthographic convention, not a grammatical one. [4] Contension 2. Advuhcacy My opponent mentions three people who agree with him without providing any evidence that they agree with him. This is a blatant ad populum fallacy and also an overlapping appeal to authority fallacy using the president and Spiderman as supporters. [2, 3] Contension 3. Vairius otherr rezuns. This contention is composed of ad hominems and irrelevant information. He even makes an “I’m right because I’m right” fallacy. Upholding My Case My opponent begins by insulting my argument and calling it “boring.” He raises no legitimate objections to my case. Informed Consensus My opponent objects to the writing experts by stating the imaginary point, "Rule number 6 from this point forward is null, and void. Wallstreetatheist is a puppy killer, vote Pro." This is patently absurd, and I ask the judges to rule it out of their considerations. He drops the legitimate points about experts in their field agreeing with the Con side. Comprehensibility All of his objections have been covered in my deconstruction of his case. Furthermore, the brains flexibility in inventive grammar was not addressed. He drops the scientific evidence, the artificial grammar-learning paradigm, the brain flexibility, the point that the increasing number of English words increases spelling importance, and the point that the subtleties in language become more important with an enormous lexicon. Thank you, and Vote Pro! [1] http://thebrain.mcgill.ca... [2] http://www.nizkor.org... [3] http://www.nizkor.org... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org...; |
 |
|
Pro Meh finel speach. Tihs haz bin ah verry intresting (cough:excruciatingly boring:cough) rownd, and eye tank teh con speecker four acepting meh requezt. . . . . . . . . . Whadeva, Im gonna goo driwnk sum Jack Daniels, I cant takke tihs anniemore. . . . . . . Teh con speeker haz completly takken everytink owt of context. He nos knot wat he says. Look @ tihs quote frum Kevin Kelly. . . . "A brain is a society of very small, simple modules that cannot be said to be thinking, that are not smart in themselves. But when you have a network of them together, out of that arises a kind of smartness." . . . Idk wat taht haz two doo wiht annieting, butt it sowndz likke he relly nos wat hez talkin about. . . . I relly hav nothing two argu. My opponints caze iz completly out off contxt. Eye no he's gonna geht bahck uhp here and say itt iz in contxt butt its uh lie. Thiz wolhe db8 bin uh sausage fest, Im leaving. There r two tings u must doo now. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 2. Go c teh Dark Night Rizes. Go Jesus Go Ron Paul Go Grammer Con My opponent is hilarious, but he has dropped my previous arguments; he hasn't upheld his case after my rebuttal; the arguments sway fully to the Con side. Furthermore, he didn't have anything to say on topic in round three. Vote Con |
 |
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by jwesbruce 10 months ago
| jbeaver212 | Wallstreetatheist | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - |  | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 7 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: Imma join the vote bomb wagon, just on the other side. Pro was funnier, resolution made it clear this was not a super cereal debate. So yeah Con, you got him*thumbs up*. But there is no fun in condoning sad sandy.
Vote Placed by carpediem 10 months ago
| jbeaver212 | Wallstreetatheist | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 6 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was absolutely hilarious; however, Con points out that Pro's arguments were rebutted without response and that Con's arguments were largely ignored in the last round. Con wins spelling and grammar for obvious reasons. Con had sources.
Vote Placed by ATHOS 10 months ago
| jbeaver212 | Wallstreetatheist | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 7 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro would definitely get points for laughs, but there's no box for it. I actually agree that spelling is more important than grammar. Sometimes a word can be spelled so badly it can barely be understood. Whereas with incorrect grammar you can still understand the basic meaning of what is being communicated within the context of the surrounding words.
Vote Placed by InVinoVeritas 10 months ago
| jbeaver212 | Wallstreetatheist | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 3 | 2 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't get it. He was supposed to type with improper grammar... This is a joke debate. Ugh.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 10 months ago
| jbeaver212 | Wallstreetatheist | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 2 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con had superior arguments, but Pro made me laugh far more.
I am the Roman king and above grammar.
King Sigismund the First