The Instigator
kernst14
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Stephen_Hawkins
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points

Is it possible to have a three second debate round?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 4 votes the winner is...
Stephen_Hawkins
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/11/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 672 times Debate No: 22750
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

kernst14

Con

There is no way to have a three second debate round because there is no way to fit everything and talk that fast..
Stephen_Hawkins

Pro

It is possible to have a three second debate round. However, as my opponent points out, it would be incredibly bad. However, this does not mean that a three second debate round is possible.

How can there be a three second debate round?

Simple: Can there be a twelve hour debate round? Yes, there can.
Can there be an eleven hour debate round? Yes, there can.
Does the reduction of time make it any less possible? No, it does not.

So no matter how much you reduce the debate round, it is still possible to have a debate round of that period of time. QED.

(Although the proof is not 100% airtight, I provided an argument promoting my view, whilst my opponent did not.)

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Mestari 4 years ago
Mestari
kernst14Stephen_HawkinsTied
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: Pro had an argument.
Vote Placed by jwesbruce 4 years ago
jwesbruce
kernst14Stephen_HawkinsTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 convince me from the opening statement of Pro. A debate simply cannot happen within three seconds. Its simple logic. I agree with it. Pro's appeal to the technicalities of the "debate reality" did not convince me that Con was wrong in her statement. This vote is incredibly easy. Its a shame how reasoning is escaped so easily in the debate world for technical, evasive arguments.
Vote Placed by Jhate 4 years ago
Jhate
kernst14Stephen_HawkinsTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Proof of 3 second round Con - i withdraw my arguments Pro- Arguments extended thats one round, dosent have to be first round
Vote Placed by thett3 4 years ago
thett3
kernst14Stephen_HawkinsTied
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: I was gonna run a time warp that allows us to have a full round in 3 seconds, but Pro took the debate before I got the chance