The Instigator
Benshapiro
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
scienceNerd48
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

It is impossible for my opponent to win this debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes-5
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 8 votes the winner is...
scienceNerd48
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/14/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,089 times Debate No: 52458
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (14)
Votes (8)

 

Benshapiro

Pro

Please read the rule before accepting this debate.

Rule #1) by accepting this debate, you acknowledge that you lose this debate and forfeit all 7 points.

Therefore, whoever accepts this debate will lose according to the rule agreed upon before accepting.
scienceNerd48

Con

Rules:
1) See Above
2) I am exempt from rule #1
Debate Round No. 1
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
The lesson here is that rules are arbitrary and rely on the voters determination
Posted by Benshapiro 3 years ago
Benshapiro
I understand people are voting against me because this was a bad debate but it still wouldn't make any sense for my opponent to win. He lost upon accepting as the rule clearly stated. If con was able to change any rules upon accepting a debate then he could change the agreed upon BoP during the course of the debate which wouldn't make any sense. One round debates are still a viable option so I don't understand why they're bad although the topic of the debate was was given it should've been impossible for my opponent to win. This debate hasn't been useless though because it has inadvertently shown interesting implications for how people justify their votes on debates they don't agree with.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Its an odd one, since pro agreed to the same rule.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
"The fact that I had stated whoever accepts this debate must willfully adhere to this rule automatically guarantees a loss from my opponent."

You didn't state this. You merely stated "Please read the rule before accepting this debate."
Posted by Benshapiro 3 years ago
Benshapiro
Wolf24- how did con obviously win and have a more convincing argument? You penalized me for having worse spelling and grammar too which does't make sense.
Posted by Teemo 3 years ago
Teemo
How is he wrong? Above in a sentence should not have a capital since it isn't a name, nor the beginning of the sentence.
Posted by nerosmoke 3 years ago
nerosmoke
lol
Posted by scienceNerd48 3 years ago
scienceNerd48
No actually he isn't.
Posted by Teemo 3 years ago
Teemo
Spaceking is correct, you are false sciencenerd.
Posted by scienceNerd48 3 years ago
scienceNerd48
It is a command that is capitalized everywhere else you look so before you poopoo other peoples ideas look it up.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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: Because no. Now stop making these debates.
Vote Placed by TheOncomingStorm 3 years ago
TheOncomingStorm
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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: Pro started a truism debate, thus a loss of conduct points. I'm giving arguments to con as well to ensure that pro does not receive points for this debate as it was a cheap shot attempt at gaining ELO and voting rights.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Debate is invalid and nobody should win.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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: At the moment Con hit "accept" he agreed to the rule saying that he would forfeit all seven points. I think voters are not strictly bound by the rules that both parties accept for the debate, but generally they do. There are debates where the rule is that no one should vote, and it seems people always comply. Rules cannot be added after acceptance, because if they were then Con could add a rule in the final round that guarantees he wins. Rules have to be known going in.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to con because pro obviously made this debate either to vote or for elo. Pro did not meet his BoP because he did not say that con could not create rules, and con's rules refuted pro's rules. Thus, con wins this debate.
Vote Placed by dtaylor971 3 years ago
dtaylor971
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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 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: Conduct to con because pro obviously made this debate either to vote or for elo. Pro did not meet his BoP because he did not say that con could not create rules, and con's rules refuted pro's rules. Thus, con wins this debate.
Vote Placed by bluesteel 3 years ago
bluesteel
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro wins because generally Con cannot make up rules. But Pro loses conduct for instigating two debates that are impossible for the Contender to win. Pro -- have you ever considered actually trying to debate on this site? It requires choosing a topic that actually has two sides. If you could do a real debate that is longer than 500 characters, that would be great. You don't deserve getting voting privileges from these sham debates.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 3 years ago
9spaceking
BenshapiroscienceNerd48Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: ....pointless. However, con did capitalize "Above".