The Instigator
Bieberman
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
imabench
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Harvard Uni is for stupid people

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 1 vote the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/4/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,890 times Debate No: 22577
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

Bieberman

Con

It is in my strong belief that Harvard university only accepts the best students.

As con, I will be supporting the claim above.

Pro must convince our readers that Harvard uni is for stupid people only.
DO NOT INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE OR MESS WITH ME
imabench

Pro

"Pro must convince our readers that Harvard uni is for stupid people only.
DO NOT INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE OR MESS WITH ME"

I define stupid people as smart people since the Con did not define the phrase "stupid people".

Con is arguing that Harvard is not for smart people
I am arguing that harvard is for smart people

You have been officially messed with, imabench style >;D



Debate Round No. 1
Bieberman

Con

Bieberman forfeited this round.
imabench

Pro

Well my opponents account has been closed, and I would like to believe he left in a rage because of me trolling him in this debate meant for an easy win.

However in my trolling t has been brought to my attention that in order to win this trolled debate I have to now define what "Smart People" means since I just defined stupid people as smart people. So allow me to now define what Smart People are.

Smart People are people who
1) have the means to pay $65,000 a year to go to Harvard and are smart enough to meet their academic qualifications required to apply

or

2) are of sufficient intelligence to exceed the academic qualifications and get a scholarship from Harvard and not have to pay $65,000 a year

Two things characterize people who get into Harvard University, they have the ability to pay the costs of going to Harvard, and they meet the academic requirements for getting into Harvard..... So let me Recap my arguments,

1) I defined Stupid People as Smart People
2) I defined Smart People as those who are smart enough to meet Harvard's Admission Standards and have the means to pay $65,000 a year, or as people who are smart enough to surpass Harvard's standards enough to get a scholarship.
3) Harvard has high academic standards and high costs
4) People who do get into Harvard meet both the academic and financial requirements to get in
5) Those people that get in have the means to pay and are smart enough to qualify
6) Those people are what I define as smart
7) I defined stupid people as smart people

Therefore stupid people go to Harvard

I hope that my arguments are sufficient, If they are not feel free to comment about what I left out

Thanks :D
Debate Round No. 2
Bieberman

Con

Bieberman forfeited this round.
imabench

Pro

Vote pro since the con didn't present a single argument for his case :)
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Dakota, this is what happens when people make stupid debates designed to give them an easy win. People like me come along, change one thing, and then completely derail them.

Besides it doesnt even matter Biebermans account is closed
Posted by DakotaKrafick 5 years ago
DakotaKrafick
"I define stupid people as smart people since the Con did not define the phrase "stupid people"."

Come the f*ck on...
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Advice noticed and taken, thanks for the tip :D
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
You are Pro, and you have the burden of proof, so you need to make a prima facie case. You assume the burden not only by being Pro, but by taking an apparent position contrary to conventional thinking. Con can win without saying a word if you don't make a plausible case. You have implicitly claimed that in this debate we cannot take words in their ordinary meanings, so you have to make a plausible case within those bounds. Since Con has vanished, you'll have space to try to do that.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
was concerned about that but his account is closed so I can go ahead and fix that (bullet dodged)
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
You failed to define "smart people."
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
Well im going to argue that he left anyways
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
He was banned not deactivated
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
LAME! I took a fun debate with this guy :(
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
LOL, he must have been really p*ssed
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 5 years ago
1dustpelt
BiebermanimabenchTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: ff