The Instigator
nonprophet
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

John Edward is a psychic medium fraud

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: Select Winner
Started: 5/13/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,158 times Debate No: 54289
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (82)
Votes (0)

 

nonprophet

Pro

First round is for acceptance only
Wylted

Con

John Edwards is a psychic, fool!!!!!!

He helped me talk to my dead dad, and resolve some issues we still had when he was alive.
Debate Round No. 1
nonprophet

Pro

My opponent has been asking me for debates over and over again.
I was stupid enough to give him a chance, hoping he could act like an adult.

Of course he ignored the rule "First round is for acceptance only"

So the debate is now over and he lost his privilege to debate me.
Fool me once...

This is another perfect example why I don't allow votes on debates.
I'm sure stopping the debate here would have gotten him flooded with unfair votes.
Voters here tend to reward cheaters who break the rules.

I would say this was a very satisfying debate. I learned a lot from it:

1. Wylted can't act like an adult and isn't worth my time.
2. No-vote debates can give me the opportunity to test if somebody can really debate or just act foolish without risking a loss.


Whatever Wylted says from now on will be ignored by me. I'm sorry I actually gave him a chance against my better judgement.
Wylted

Con

My opponent has not made any arguments. I'll give him another round to do so, before I embarrass him by proving John Edward is for real.
Debate Round No. 2
nonprophet

Pro

My opponent forfeited by breaking the rules in the first round. This debate has already ended.
Wylted

Con

My opponent immediately disrespects me in round 2. It's pretty common for an acceptance round to also contain a silly sentence or 2 instead of the actual words "I accept". A silly sentence or 2 actually serves the same purpose.

@nonprophet, you need to conduct yourself in a more respectable manner around here. There is a reason why people almost unanimously dislike you.

I know it's common for jerks to think "everyone else is the problem", but by applying Occam's Razor to your situation, you can see. That it is you who is the jerk.

I reccomend you read -How to Win Friends and Influence People, for the digital age-.

It might help you to be treated better, and actually be respected.
Debate Round No. 3
82 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Nonprophet, because he just happens to be correct
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
@iamanatheistandthisiswhy Why would I enjoy that?
Posted by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 2 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Here is a debate for you all to enjoy ;)
http://www.debate.org...
Posted by Shadow-Dragon 2 years ago
Shadow-Dragon
Hey, Can you both please stop arguing over this debate?
The debate is over, and it's a tie. Both of you arguing in the comments is not going to solve this problem.
Thanks.
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
Idiot...all in fun...now shut up, grow up and give up.
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
No an argument requires premises. Those had no premises and the name calling was in fun
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
"John Edwards is a psychic, fool!!!!!!"
That's an argument and name calling. (2 Conduct violations)

"He helped me talk to my dead dad, and resolve some issues we still had when he was alive."

Argument...not an acceptance of a debate. (Conduct violation)
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
You're not trying to have serious debates. Stop lying. If you were you wouldn't debate topics that everyone agrees with, like John Edward is a fraud. Everyone agrees he is. Also you wouldn't derail an entire debate for something that most people would agree isn't a conduct violation. I think you know it's not a conduct violation. You know that it's a commonly accepted practice here. You wer just being a coward. It basically means no arguments in R1, and there were no arguments in R1 so you're just being a coward and running away from a debate, you can't win.
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
@Themba Sorry you think so. Maybe Wylted should go visit websites like clownaround.com or badcomedians.com. I'm trying to have serious debates here, not stand up comedy.
Posted by nonprophet 2 years ago
nonprophet
@numberwang You ask, "if you were't going to debate unless you got exactly "I accept" in round 1, why didn't you say so?"

What part of "First round is for acceptance only" don't you understand?

"And at most, that should cost him a conduct point, not any other points, since he only broke debate conduct (even though he barely did)."

Well maybe on other people's debates, it costs a conduct point, but in my debates, if you can't follow a simple rule, you are a cheater and lose automatically. Cheaters don't deserve any points and should not be rewarded with any. If you lose one point to gain 6 by cheating, that encourages cheating.
I won't tolerate that on my debates.

"Why refuse to debate completely when faced with such a small infraction?"
Cheating is not a small infraction. Why bother debating a cheater at all? Not worth my time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.