The Instigator
TeddyBearNinja
Con (against)
Tied
10 Points
The Contender
leuvoyj
Pro (for)
Tied
10 Points

Lucky Charms Marshmellows

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 5 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2013 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,379 times Debate No: 32587
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (5)

 

TeddyBearNinja

Con

I personally believe that thwe makers of lucky charms should change the shapes of the cliched "lucky charms"
leuvoyj

Pro

Why do you think so?
Debate Round No. 1
TeddyBearNinja

Con

The shapes of the charms marshmallows mainly taking into consideration the recent substitution of new "charms" which have never had any relation with being lucky.. This needs to be changed because it is falsely advertising a cereal named lucky charms by using the charms that aren't actually lucky at all.
leuvoyj

Pro

There hasn't been a new permanent marshmallow addition since 2008 so you may need to do some research. The lucky charms refer to the leprechaun named "Lucky" and his magical charms. The marshmallows aren't meant to be charms that are considered to be lucky in society.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
TeddyBearNinja

Con

Is Wikipedia really a credible source? I believe that many brands such as the makers of lucky charms need to consider a healthier alternative and stop producing foods that ultimately can lead to health issues such as childhood obesity.
leuvoyj

Pro

I've mentioned in the comments that I didn't use the actual Wikipedia article I used a citation in the article. Feel free to look for yourself. It's citation 11. Also, your initial argument was that they should change the shape of the marshmallows, not the marshmallows themselves. Try not to change the subject.
Debate Round No. 3
TeddyBearNinja

Con

i they are nasty.
leuvoyj

Pro

Again, that's had nothing to do with the shapes.
Debate Round No. 4
TeddyBearNinja

Con

I think we can all agree that a lifestyle with lucky charms involved leads to perpetual lose of self-identity and encourages child slavery
leuvoyj

Pro

I disagree. Lucky charms brings happy was through deliciousness.
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by leuvoyj 4 years ago
leuvoyj
My iPhone autocorrected a lot of this stuff very weird lol
Posted by TruthTrust 4 years ago
TruthTrust
Hi-larious debate!
Posted by leuvoyj 4 years ago
leuvoyj
That's what I'm wondering lol
Posted by jdog2016 4 years ago
jdog2016
why is the voting period so long?
Posted by kellyclarksonlover 4 years ago
kellyclarksonlover
It's cool man! That's just how the dice roll sometimes on debate.org right? Let's just be friends🌟
Posted by leuvoyj 4 years ago
leuvoyj
I'm not trying to be sassy. Just trying to keep my thoughts clear and keep the debate on the right track. I'm sorry if I come as sassy lol.
Posted by kellyclarksonlover 4 years ago
kellyclarksonlover
Good to hear we both like those charms. But I might add you are being a bit sassy to TeddyBearNinja?? No need for that bro, let's just keep it real homie.
Posted by leuvoyj 4 years ago
leuvoyj
I do enjoy a good bowl of lucky charms and I love the marshmallows. Again I only used the Wikipedia cite as an annotation. I used the General Mills website used in citation 11.
Posted by kellyclarksonlover 4 years ago
kellyclarksonlover
I'm sorry pal, but I can never agree with someone who starts their case with Wikipedia. But what I'd like to know is do you yourself enjoy an occasional bowl of Lucky Charms? And if so, do you love the marshmallows in it?
Posted by leuvoyj 4 years ago
leuvoyj
First off I don't usually use Wikipedia unless the section I use has I reliable cite. I looked at citation 11 to form my argument. I only used the Wikipedia link to make readily available the thought and the citation. Wikipedia isn't always bad.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Ardenwa 4 years ago
Ardenwa
TeddyBearNinjaleuvoyjTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: What did I just attempt to read?
Vote Placed by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
TeddyBearNinjaleuvoyjTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Agree with Imebench
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico
TeddyBearNinjaleuvoyjTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's final point makes no sense... And pro countered by saying they're delicious, which they are. So Pro wins. Also, Con had a round where he wrote gibberish "i they are nasty" so spelling and grammar to pro as well. I can't believe I actually read this "debate".
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
TeddyBearNinjaleuvoyjTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Nobody deserves to win this debate since both sides were horrendously bad
Vote Placed by jdog2016 4 years ago
jdog2016
TeddyBearNinjaleuvoyjTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: In round 3, con said "i they are nasty." I don't know what that means, so pro gets spelling.