The Instigator
KingDebater
Con (against)
Winning
30 Points
The Contender
GuyFawkes69
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points

GuyFawkes69 is 5 years old.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 5 votes the winner is...
KingDebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/29/2013 Category: Funny
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 903 times Debate No: 43083
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (5)

 

KingDebater

Con

I am con. The font size of my arguments will be very big in this debate so this supposed 5-year old can read them. My arguments will also be in the font Comic sans MS because children love it nearly as much as colours and cartoon characters.


First of all, I'd like to welcome Guy to this site.

On GuyFawkes69's profile comments, he makes the claim that he's 5 years old (1). I know this to be false for the following reasons:

1. His name is "GuyFawkes69". If he were 5 years old now, his user name would be one of these:
IwillBuyAnythingSoLongAsItHasACartoonCharacterOnIt
TweeniesLover123
IWANTIT
Constant_Cryer123
Me=5
Toddler123
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Toys
squirrels=lovly
sweets
NothingWorthSaying
IncompetentLittleAnnoyance
coolawesomedude

2. Somebody who is 5 years old would never have been able to log in. They probably would've just stared at a pretty colourful shape waiting for the internet to happen for 5 hours and by then, he or she would've forgotten completely about the whole thing.

3. A 5-year old would've dribbled the computer to death by now, meaning he wouldn't still have this account if he were 5.

4. Debate.org is not a very colourful site, nor is the homepage covered by an easily-recognizable cartoon character, so it has no appeal to someone of 5 years of age.

5. A 5-year old would still be amazed by the fact that his hand can move, so he would definitely be too distracted by the movement of his fingers to do anything else (other than cry or beg mummy and daddy to buy the thing with the cartoon character on it).

Thank you.

Sources
(1) http://www.debate.org...

GuyFawkes69

Pro

I am pro for me being 5.

1. I spam the poll section with terrible grammar errors and polls like "could I be a dog". Only a 5 year old is stupid enough to think he is a dog. I also watch family guy and my name has "69" at the end of it.

2. I have a youtube account. Many 5-15 year olds have youtube accounts and watch pewdiepie(look him up). This website has the colour orange all over it which is my favourite colour. I did forget a few times but I managed to make an account.

3. MY COMPUTER KEYS ARE BROKE. IT'S MY CAPLOCKS BUTTON AND ALSO THIS IS MY DADS COMPUTER NOT MINE.

4. once again my favourite colours are orange and black. This website also has the poll section which is covered in pictures and words that I can read.

5. I stopped that when I was 4 and my finger movements are cool. I went into the poll section and it said " who would win in a fight batman or superman". They are both comic book characters and they both pander to my age group.
Debate Round No. 1
KingDebater

Con

Thanks to Guy for accepting this debate.

1. Pro is wrong here, much like a child would be. The only person who'd post polls like "could I be a dog" are obviously the move of a philosopher who is at least 20 years old. You see, if you look at it philosophically, we're all dogs in one way or another; some of us bury bones in the garden, some of us wear a collar, and some of us get dog hair all over the sofa. The previous sentence is the sort of rubbish that would come out of their mouth.
Also, the fact that pro is conscious of his evil errors means that really he knows better. A normal 5-year old would just be 110% sure that he's right, because that's what these know-it-all 5-year olds are like.

2. 5-year olds don't watch videos on youtube, they watch DVDs, such as the DVD in one simpsons episode that just has a load of floating shapes in it (Season 24, Episode 13: Hardly Kirk-ing). 5-year olds just recognize pewdiepie as one of them, a normal guy in their eyes; incoherent, babbling nonsensically about who-knows-what and playing games, so no 5-year old would watch pewdiepie as it would be pointless. It would just be watching their life, which isn't as fun as experiencing their life normally and fully.

3. See, this is proof. This supposed 5-year old hasn't renderred his computer entirely unfunctioning. By now, a 5-year old would've poured 5 tons of apple juice into the hard drive and pro wouldn't have been able to write his argument.

4. A 5-year old's favourite colours are the bright colours featured in the rainbow, everyone knows that! The tone of orange used on this site doesn't actually appear in the rainbow. Plus, there's no cartoon character so a 5-year old would have a -5000% chance of signing up to this non-cartoon non-appealing to toddlers site. This argument stands.

5. Superheroes are for 3-year olds and 20+ nerds. Also, a 5-year old would spell it like "hooo wood winn a fite betweeeeeeeen soprman and battybooman", not the way pro spelled it.

So you see, pro is much older than 5.

Thank you.

Sources
The truth


GuyFawkes69

Pro

GuyFawkes69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
I was the only person to debate with the user GuyFawkes69. I feel honoured.
Posted by JustAnotherGuy 3 years ago
JustAnotherGuy
GuyFawkes69 got banned. Being only hours into having his/her account started, this is sort of impressive.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Anonymous 3 years ago
Anonymous
KingDebaterGuyFawkes69Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: At first I thought con was just another troll, but it was too funny not to vote for him,
Vote Placed by InfiniteBears 3 years ago
InfiniteBears
KingDebaterGuyFawkes69Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made a lot of great arguments, and pro wrote with great grammer
Vote Placed by miketheman1200 3 years ago
miketheman1200
KingDebaterGuyFawkes69Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF by Pro loses him conduct. Con had far better arguments and Pro did a fairly poor job or none at all of refuting them. Sources go to con because "the truth"
Vote Placed by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
KingDebaterGuyFawkes69Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Guy has proven that he is excessively retarded
Vote Placed by birdlandmemories 3 years ago
birdlandmemories
KingDebaterGuyFawkes69Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to con due to the forfeit. Sources and arguments to con since pro was the only one to use sources, and hia argument in round 2 was not refuted.