The Instigator
Marauder
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
m93samman
Con (against)
Losing
18 Points

I will not contradict myself!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,503 times Debate No: 15654
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (20)
Votes (11)

 

Marauder

Pro

Resolved: I, Maruader, will not contradict myself.

Rules:

1. CON must post 10 questions, directed at PRO, that could be answered with a 'yes' or 'no' or else CON loses. This does not apply to the final round.

2. PRO must respond to all questions posed by CON in some manner or else PRO loses.

3. If PRO's response does not give any opinion (e.g. "I don't know" or "I'm not sure"), then CON is entitled to another question next round. This is the only reason CON may post more than 10 questions.

4. PRO wins if he is found never to have contradicted himself. Likewise, CON wins if he can prove that PRO has contradicted himself.

5. Only statements made by PRO in rounds 2, 3, and 4 of this debate are subject to be examined for contradiction. No outside sources (my profile, previous debates, etc.) are applicable. Statements made by PRO in this debate not in direct response to any question posed by CON are still applicable.

6. Round 5 no more questions can be asked, it is for final defense of PRO that in the previous rounds he has not contradicted himself and CON to make his/her finale case that PRO in fact did contradict himself.
===========

one of the first debates I read on this site was one of these debates; and it looked fun. good luck to my opponent whosoever picks up this challenge
m93samman

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate, and look forward to a lot of fun!

QUESTIONS

1. Will you contradict yourself?
2. Is it possible that you will contradict yourself?
3. Have you contradicted yourself yet?
4. Is the answer to this question "no"?

5. If I'm a fish, and you're a fish, are we both fish?
6. If you're a box, and I'm a box, are we both box?
7. Have you contradicted yourself yet?
8. What's the square root of 69?
9. Do you believe in God?
10. Don't you believe in God?
Debate Round No. 1
Marauder

Pro

Thank you for accapting this debate, I can see already I will have quite the challenge with questions like number 4. I will do my best to not contridict myself now and answer all the questions.

1) "Will you contradict yourself?"
It is my intention to not do any such thing.

2) "Is it possible that you will contradict yourself?"
Well, considering I didnt get some amature opponent for the CON position of this debate, but someone I know from his past debates like this one http://www.debate.org... that creative thinking is his strong suite, So it's quite possible he will get me to contradict myself. But I will be positive in attitude and try to believe that I can make it one debate without contradicting myself.

3) "Have you contradicted yourself yet?"
No I don't think I have yet. I believe both my answers to question's 1 and 2 are consistant with each other.

4) "Is the answer to this question 'no'?"
Thankfully, the rules state in round one that I must answer all the questions in 'some manner' so I'm not restricted to just 'yes' or 'no' answers. Obviously if I put 'yes' then it would be wrong, and if I put 'no' then by definiton that would also be wrong. I answer that 'this question' is a paradox.
Personally I think that statement "'this queston' is a paradox." counts as giveing an answer of some kind with an oppinon; but if you feel it's akin to answering with a "I don't know" then go ahead and give yourself an 11th question next round as allowed by Rule 3.

5) "If I'm a fish, and you're a fish, are we both fish?"
Yes, that's the grammar I learned growing up, that the plural of 'fish' is still 'fish'. Interestingly I've notice if you ever refer to a fish as 'fishy' (like a girl, or a 3 year old) then 'fishy' becomes plural as 'fishies'.

6) "If you're a box, and I'm a box, are we both box?"
No, the grammar I learned growing up alway's reffered to 'box' in the plural as 'boxes'.

7) "Have you contradicted yourself yet?"
It seem's a waist to me for you to ask this question twice. You will have the opportuniety to argue that my answers to any combination of the questions are contradictions round 2, 3, 4, and 5; basically the rest of the debate. It's redundant to try and get me to contradict on a question like this when getting me to do so hinges on having already made a contradiction. And if I already have then that previous contradiction negates the resolution all by itself. That's what I think anyway, but mabye you will show me a different purpose for asking this question again that I'm not creatively thinking of, so I will answer it again simalar to my answer for question 3, No I do not think I have yet contradicted myself with my answers to the past 6 questions

8) "What's the squre root of 69?"
Well, this calculator reads the irrational number out to 8.306623862918075 http://www.calculator.com...=-

9) "Do you believe in God?"
I believe in God.

10) "Don't you believe in God?"
I believe in God

If 'God' needs defined to reduce confusion about those answers so we understand I do not contradict in those last two questions then I would like to specify that I of course do not mean 'a flying spagettie monster' when I say 'God' or an 'Anceint Astronout'. I mean the Methodist, Christian view of 'God' that is written of in the bible, a book that is well worth reading.


I look foward to reading your 10/11 new questions next round and your arguments for how I may have contradicted myself with the 10 questions in this round.

m93samman

Con

So far, I have no contradictions to put forth.

ROUND 2

1. Can irrational numbers be expressed to 100% accuracy in a decimal format?

2. Do you believe spelling and grammar are important in debate?

3. Do you believe that conduct is important in debate?

4. Have you ever played Poke'mon? If so, have you ever captured Pikachu?

5. Is .9999999(repeating) equal to 1?

6. If you are given an "If-then" statement in the form such that the "then" is a question, and you answer the "then", is the "if" statement presumed to be true?

7. Is it time for me to present your contradictions?

8. What is the value of the golden ratio/golden number? (Whichever you prefer to call it)

9. Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

10. Is anything possible?

Debate Round No. 2
Marauder

Pro


1. Can irrational numbers be expressed to 100% accu
racy in a decimal format?

If you had a infinite amount of space to expressed the decimal on, time to write it down in that space was not such a hindering issue, than I guess you could. But unless your God I think no one else has that kind of space or mastery over time to finish expressing the irrational number. So no, not to 100% accuracy without divine intervention.

2. Do you believe spelling and grammar are important in debate?
I think I would do well to consider it more important in my debates as my lack of doing so has led me to losing the spelling and grammar points in nearly all my debates from most voters. Good spelling, grammar, and formatting I do admit make the debate argument's I have read look much more professional and intelligent, but as long I communicate what I need to in a argument it's really hard to remember to care.

3. Do you believe that conduct is important in debate?
Yes. Conduct is very important, keeping the debates clean and fun also add to how professional a argumentative case appears.

4. Have you ever played Pokémon? If so, have you ever captured Pikachu?
Yes, I have played the games since the first Red & Blue version came out and play the Black version now. I have traded for a pickachu in some of the games like Crystal version from a Yellow Version Starter Pickachu so it would have a light ball, but I have actually gone through the games process in some of the other versions like Red and Pearl to 'capture' Pickachu.

5. Is .9999999(repeating) equal to 1?
You could not put an equal sign between .999999(repeating) and 1 unless that equal sign had a ~ on top of it. For practical applications though if you were ever in a circumstance where you calculated the length of wood you needed to cut was .999999(repeating)th of an inch, cutting it at 1 inch would do just fine.


6. If you are given an "If-then" statement in the form such that the "then" is a question, and you answer the "then", is the "if" statement presumed to be true?
Nice try, but I do not think I have stated that I am 'a box' and 'a fish'. Answering a 'If-then' question only provides an answer to the 'if' in a hypothetical since, there is no admission to that hypothetical 'if' being the actual case. Only consideration of what answer we would find if the 'if' were true.


7. Is it time for me to present your contradictions?
Well, if you wait until Round 5 to present the accused contradictions that I personally don't believe I have made yet, then I will have no opportunity to defend myself from them, but you are of course free to post the alleged 'contradictions' in any of the rounds, or just stick to asking questions of a yes or no nature. the rules in round one give specification to not posting questions in round 5, but not to the mandatory presentation of alleged 'contradictions' in the other rounds, Although you can't win if you do not eventually post some.


8. What is the value of the golden ratio/golden number? (Whichever you prefer to call it)
It's approximately 1.6180339887 http://en.wikipedia.org...

9. Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Maybe you will be able to show this to be a grammatically coherent sentence later in the debate, but I fail to interpret what it is the question asks. So again if you feel 'I don't understand' is akin to the answer 'I don't know' then by all means give an 11th question next round.


10. Is anything possible?
Through God all things are possible.
m93samman

Con

Thank you.

NEW QUESTIONS

1. Do you like ice cream?
2. Can pigs fly?
3. Can this swine fly?http://verynoice.com...
I'm sorry, in the midst of writing this I had a gigantic feud with my cousin overseas and lost all focus and willingness to continue this round. I'll continue in round 4; luckily, I wrote out the contradictions before I got the message. I wish you luck; have fun in Tennessee. Meanwhile, let me know if you need me to do anything else in terms of time.

CONTRADICTIONS

1. Spelling and grammar

To this question, my opponent responds "I think I would do well to consider it more important in my debates". He therefore does believe that it is important; he then proceeds to claim that "as long I communicate what I need to in a argument it's really hard to remember to care." He puts spelling and grammar both at an important and an unimportant level, which violates the law of the excluded middle.

Further, he has multiple spelling and grammar errors throughout the debate. I will, however, wait until round 5 to post them all (or as many as I can fit given the character limitations) as voters.
2. The questions "Can an irrational number be expressed to 100% accuracy in decimal format?" and "What's the square root of 69?" have incompatible answers. He says that without divine intervention, irrational numbers can't accurately be expressed; however, he proceeds to express the square root of 69 in decimal format. In the standard mathematical world, the square root of 69 would be left as is, for it is unsimplifiable. My opponent trusts the accuracy of a calculator, and so, has contradicted himself.
3. (I'll admit, this argument may be a bit of a stretch)
My opponent agrees that conduct is a good quality to express in debate. However, when it comes to the question "Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like," my opponent doesn't take the consideration to look up the question. It actually is a reference to a popular meme, and does have an answer. That answer is,
“You’ve got to be kidding me. I’ve been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It’s just common sense.”
Also, his response contradicts his rule #2. Pro did not respond to my question is some manner; he merely attacked the grammatical coherence of the question without caring for it's background.
4. Also a contradiction to rule #2, is his response to "If you are given an "If-then" statement in the form such that the "then" is a question, and you answer the "then", is the "if" statement presumed to be true?"
It would've been easier had my opponent simply said yes; claiming that he is a fish in NO WAY contradicts any other answer, and neither does claiming that he is not a fish. He chose to sidestep the question, which is a rule breaker.
Debate Round No. 3
Marauder

Pro

My opponent was only able to give 3 new questions due to a fued with his cousin. I understand his loss of focus and I am okay with him posting 17 questions next round if he wants too. For now, I will try and answer the new questions he did add this round, and defend that I have not contradicted myself.

(New Q.)
1) Do you like ice cream?

I like some flavors of ice cream, in some forms better than others.
2) Can pigs fly?
If any pig should want to fly, they should start talking to some of the pioneer animals in the field like the sheep in this video.
It's possible, even if unlikely, should God allow it.
3)Can this swine fly?http://verynoice.com......
same answer as question 2

('Contraictions')

1) Con say's I contradict by stating Spelling and Grammar are both unimportant, and important. Take note though that my comments that supposedly put spellinga and grammar at a 'unimportant' level, is "as long I communicate what I need to in a argument it's really hard to remember to care." This statement actually does not give information on what importance I put on spelling in grammar. It is a mere reflexion of the unfortounate truth that I do not have the disciplen to follow through perfectly in action with what I believe in. after I see that the message I intend to communicate is on the argument post it's easy to think 'all right I'm done, I'm going to leave this computer and play Soul Caliber now!'
My Brain mentally gives a sigh of relief after its gotten about that far through writting an essay for an english class, a sermon for sunday at church, or a debate on this site. It's that stage where I have offically finished putting and editing all the content half of the debate.
The difficulty to maintaining the disciplen to review and use spell check twice over on my argument I claim I have is consistant with any spelling and grammar errors my opponent say's I have (there probably in round 1, I didnt figure out that Firefox is not checking them autimatically in this new 'rich text' box until round 2). I can still be consistant when I hold the value that it's important to brush my teeth every morning and not actually commit to brushing each morning. Disciplen in doing something is seperate and distinct from the value one holds in actually doing it.
2) 100% accuracy & the square root of 69
My answers to question 1 last round and question 8 in round 1 do not contradict. one question asked my of my thoughts on degree of possble accuracy, the other was to provide an answer of some kind to a strait up math equation.
For all purposes the 100% accuracy is not neccisary to be confident in an answer enough to go ahead and give it, and I say as much when I answer about the equivalent of .99999 and 1 if thats what you need to cut in a piece of wood. Is the answer to the square root of 69 I gave in round 1 good enough to give, I think so. is it 100% accuarate, no but it's accurate enough.

3) I did not 'attack' your use of grammar, even suggested that you would be able to explain it later, and had I known to start looking at internet meme's I would have but my imagination was not so great as to see that might be what that question was a reference to. My answer was 'I dont understand' cause I did not, but if you look I acknowleded you could ask another question this round.
It's not a break of conduct to answer questions one dosnt understand 'I dont understand'.
4) It would not have been easier because then I would have to defend that I'm not just a fish but a box also. In any case I do not breack rule number to in that answer because I do give an answer of some kind, that a 'if-then' question is in a hypothetical sense and that answering it does not give admission to the 'if' being the actual case, only what the case would be 'if' the 'if' where so.

m93samman

Con

We are entering round 5, so it wouldn't make sense to ask new questions. I'll continue with what I have now.

1. Spelling and Grammar

My opponent isn't looking into what he wrote well enough. Let's look back. "I think I would do well to consider it more important in my debates". He therefore does believe that it is important- it is clear enough that he used the word "important".

He then proceeds to claim that "
as long I communicate what I need to in a argument it's really hard to remember to care." To care about something is to show concern with or to have some sort of regard towards it [
http://dictionary.reference.com...]; i.e. recognizing some level of importance and acting upon it. To NOT care would be to NOT recognize said level of importance; my opponent clearly is contradicting himself.
If my opponent doesn't buy this, I'll spend my entire next round on this argument, but I feel as though it is clear enough.
2. 100% accuracy vs. The square root of 69
My opponent writes, "one question asked my of my thoughts on degree of possble accuracy, the other was to provide an answer of some kind to a strait up math equation."
"A straight* up math question*" in the standard class would assume that accuracy is of utmost importance. If I asked my opponent what the value of pi was, I would not expect him to say 3.14159...

I would expect him to say simply, either "pi" or "the ratio of the circumference of the circle to its diameter. My opponent contradicts himself here as well.
I'll drop the last two contradictions I presented; a note to the readers: If I drop a presented contradiction, my opponent gains no ground. My opponent can only win if he is found to NEVER have contradicted himself in the debate.
I appreciate everyone's time.
Debate Round No. 4
Marauder

Pro

It seems my opponent is saving up all of the last round to continue to press just two contradictions, possibly just the one on spelling and grammar, so I should use this round well to give my final defense from them, for he is right that just one contradiction is needed for me to lose the debate.

Spelling and Grammar:

Since my opponent plans to put the most emphasis on my comments about the importance of spelling and grammar as a contradiction I feel a need to point out that nowhere did I say that I do not care. My statement was that "It's hard to" remember to care. For all the info that statement gives about myself you could conclude that maybe I do remember to care in spite of the difficulty or how 'hard' it is for me.

Let us also reexamine the first half of the statement as well. "I think I would do well to consider it more important...".
Though I do speak of the cold logistics of how spelling and grammar affect a debate, I open up talking about it with the admission 'I think I would do well to...' indicating that I feel that I do not yet do this, I do not care enough. If I did in fact state here that I consider it important right now I could not say 'I would do well to consider it more.....' for if I need to 'more' than what I do consider about spelling and grammars importance, then the level of importance I place on it at the time of the statement is in some way 'low' or I could not think I need to 'more'.

The term 'more' opens up how any one should sensibly read my statement about the importance of spelling and grammar as well. Without the 'more' one could read it as though I view things as either 'unimportant' or 'important' as my opponents arguments indicate that he does. But as to whether I myself have made a contradiction this debate it does not matter if Con views things as either important or not, but if I indicate that I view it that way to, and by using the term 'more' I indicate that I do not but view 'important' as something in degree's. To me, things have 'level's' of importance, it they do not then I could not say 'more'.

So there is not contradiction, my statement merely indicates a level of importance placed on spelling and grammar that mentally accepts the positive effects good spelling and grammar have on a debate, but not so high a level that I lose sleep or stress out over my mistakes. For it does fall in level of 'importance' secondary to that which has primary importance to me; the content.

Math:
I don't know what math classes they give at your high school, but the answer to what the value of Pi, 3.14 would be good enough at mine, rounding off decimal values to a value thats close enough is something we were taught to do.

also take not that I did not ever state 'equal'; like when questioned about the golden ratio I use the term 'approximately' for that's another math term they teach us to refer to the things that are not 100% accurate answers. In the question concerning the answer to the square root of 69 I openly label it an irrational number and simply give the decimal number out to as far as an online calculator would unsure of yet what answer you where looking for yet, but when talking about math usually its expected that you change what your given on the question sheet in some way even if it cannot be simplified.

I thank my opponent for this fun debate, hope the readers will find that I have not contradicted myself. I am sorry for any spelling errors, I was in a rush round 4 in particular and I think it shows in the spelling and grammar has the most mistakes that round.
m93samman

Con

Before I conclude this debate, I would like to thank my opponent for what was a wonderful and enjoyable debate; I would also like to thank the audience for the time they put in to the consideration of the arguments made and the votes that resulted.

Formalities aside, this debate comes down to two primary arguments (as has been made quite clear). I will address them in increasing order of importance. First, the mathematics issue. Second, the spelling and grammar issue. However, because I believe I have done a strong enough job, I won't waste the readers' time.

1) Spelling and grammar.

To be honest, and to point out the irony, my opponent's argument is incredibly hard to understand. I've read it multiple times and I still have trouble deciphiring what he has to say. Nonetheless; we look to his first paragraph addressing the argument. He attempts to deny that he says he doesn't care, but rather, quotes himself on saying "It's hard to" care. If it's hard to remember to care, and my opponent doesn't remember to care, then he doesn't care.

Syllogistically, my opponent has lost this point, and thus the round. Moving on,
2) Mathematics.
I hold that the majority of classes around the nation would teach that a circle with a radius of 2 inches has a circumference of 4*pi, not 12.42; likewise, the golden ratio should always be expressed as (1 + sqrt.(5))/2 [http://en.wikipedia.org...]
This is a generally accepted rule, and, given that my opponent and I agreed that accuracy is paramount in mathematics, he contradicted himself by rounding numbers off to 'x' number of decimal places (it varied by answer)
Once again, I'd like to thank my opponent for the debate and the readers for their time.
Debate Round No. 5
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by PervRat 5 years ago
PervRat
I voted Pro for conduct because Con intentionally wrote gobbldeygook answers that followed no grammar whatsoever and thus had no meaning. To me, unintentional spelling and grammar errors are noteworthy for the Spelling and Grammar vote; intentionally writing with bad spelling and grammar constitutes bad conduct to me.
Posted by m93samman 5 years ago
m93samman
Cliff gave me conduct because he didn't want to give me all three points for arguments; he gave me 1/3. Idk about the other one though
Posted by Marauder 5 years ago
Marauder
I'm curious why people are giving away conduct points, I thought we were both pretty respectful.
Posted by Marauder 5 years ago
Marauder
indecently, I've heard in other countries not even 2+2 =4. that the only thing that can accurately be said to truly equal 4 is 4=4. It's been awhile since I was told this so I don't remember what country that person was talking about but I think it was India.
Posted by Marauder 5 years ago
Marauder
thank you maninorange the math major for confirming my case about math.
Posted by m93samman 5 years ago
m93samman
OM NOM NOM NOm
Posted by PervRat 5 years ago
PervRat
Grah, the symbols got eaten >_<
Posted by PervRat 5 years ago
PervRat
There were a couple iffies, especially on math with irrational numbers. IIRC, the question is whether irrational numbers can be accurately written using decimals, and CON seemed to imply that Pi was an irrational number that fit the bill. However, Pi (&#960;) is not a 'decimal number.' If symbols are allowed, &#8730;2 could be used.
Posted by cowpie1998 5 years ago
cowpie1998
Marauder was wrong in saying that .9 repeated is not 1.

.3 repeated is a third, this is a proven mathematical fact.
therefore, .9 repeated (3*.3repeated) is three thirds or 1 over 1.

I conclude that Marauder should check his answer for that question.
Posted by m93samman 5 years ago
m93samman
I'll probably be done by tonight
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Proving_a_Negative 1 year ago
Proving_a_Negative
Marauderm93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: He did not contradict himself. Loaded questions, paradoxes, non yes or no questions, multiple questions in the same question and more all made me vote for pro.
Vote Placed by Xerge 3 years ago
Xerge
Marauderm93sammanTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: counter jimloyd
Vote Placed by jimloyd 3 years ago
jimloyd
Marauderm93sammanTied
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: i do not believe he contradicted himelf
Vote Placed by DylanAsdale 5 years ago
DylanAsdale
Marauderm93sammanTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Maruader might not contradict himself, but whether Marauder does is not up for debate. Was the switching of the two letters intentional?
Vote Placed by mongeese 5 years ago
mongeese
Marauderm93sammanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: None of the two remaining "contradictions" were all that powerful. The grammar one seemed easily explained as an ideal importance of spelling and grammar that is difficult to achieve. (For example, a person could believe that working out is important, yet still fail to work out every day. The math one is even simpler. Most math tests that I have taken (Texas Math League being one of them), accepts answers with at least four significant digits, even if they aren't exact.
Vote Placed by maninorange 5 years ago
maninorange
Marauderm93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree that things are not important or non-important, but important in varying degrees. Also, as a math major, I can say that for the purposes of putting things in calculators and/or programming the calculator, we must round. Approximations must be accepted.
Vote Placed by PervRat 5 years ago
PervRat
Marauderm93sammanTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Tough to call. Some of Con's questions were incomprehensible. Pro's spelling and grammar are quite bad ... not the worst I have seen on DDO, but pretty abysmal.
Vote Placed by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
Marauderm93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Hilareous and fun debate! I wish I could be con in this debate. I also would like to say that I voted for pro only because he did not contradict himself!
Vote Placed by anarcholibertyman 5 years ago
anarcholibertyman
Marauderm93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not contradict himself, the spelling contradiction wasn't really a contradiction, more of a mininterpretation.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
Marauderm93sammanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con barely gets the argument vote based on the spelling contradiction. It seems like it could have been easily avoided though.