The Instigator
Rational_Thinker9119
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
JonathanCrane
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

My Opponent Will Lose This Debate

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 2 votes the winner is...
Rational_Thinker9119
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/22/2013 Category: Arts
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 929 times Debate No: 34984
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

Rule 1: If a rule is broken (directly or indirectly), then an automatic 7 point forfeit results for whoever broke the rule

Rule 2: Rules with a * beside them only apply to my opponent

*Rule 3: First round is just for acceptance

*Rule 4: In every round, every other letter must be a capitol letter, with the remaining letters being lower case letters, starting with a lower case letter (For example, "aBcDeF..." but obviously they don't have to be in alphabetical order)

Rule 5: No contesting a rule after the debate has been accepted

Have fun, and good luck! I don't why I decided to do this but it should be entertaining ha

JonathanCrane

Con

aVe.

I aCcEpT tHiS dEbAtE.

vAlE
Debate Round No. 1
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

I think my opponent for accepting this debate. However, my opponent broke *Rule 3:

"*Rule 3: First round is just for acceptance"

Note the just...

Now, if you notice my opponent's first round, it is as follows:


"aVe.


I aCcEpT tHiS dEbAtE.



vAlE"


If you review the above, you will realize that my opponent did not just accept the debate, but he added and unnecessary "aVe." and an unnecessary "vAlE". Rule 3 specifically states that the first round is just for acceptance, that excludes any unnecessary "aVe." or "vAle".

Since my opponent did not just accept the debate, and included extra illegal comentary, he broke *Rule 3. This means he lost the debate due to Rule 1:

"Rule 1: If a rule is broken (directly or indirectly), then an automatic 7 point forfeit results for whoever broke the rule"

Vote Pro.


JonathanCrane

Con

aVe.

I pOsT 'aVe' AnD 'vAlE' aT tHe StArT oF aLl My RoUnDs. FoR mE, tHe DeFiNiTiOn Of AcCePtInG a DeBaTe Is 'PoStInG aVe, I aCcEpT, aNd ThEn VaLe'. ThE gReEtInG aNd GoOdByE aRe PaRt Of AcCePtAnCe,NnOt SoMeThInG oUtSiDe Of It. ThErE aRe No ReAsOnS tO tHiNk ThAt ThEy HaVe To Be OuTsIdE oF iT.

alSo, EvEn If PrO iS rIgHt, AlL hE's DoNe Is PrOvE tHaT i ShOuLd LoSe ThE dEbAtE, nOt ThAt I wIiL. mAyBe It WiLl Be A tIe. maYbE sOmEoNe WiLl MaSsIvElY vOtEbOmB iN mY fAvOr At ThW lAsT sEcOnD. MAyBe NoBoDy WiLl VoTe. PrO hAs NoT oFfErEd A sInGlE rEaSoN tO aFfIrM tHe ReSoLuTiOn, ThErEfOre It Is NeGaTeD. SInCe ThE rSsOlUtIoN iS nEgAtEd, PrE hAs NoT mEt HiS bUrDeN oF pRoOf. siNcE pRo HaS nOt MeT hIs BuRdEn Of PrOoF, cOn WiNs.

VaLe.
Debate Round No. 2
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

My opponent claims that he starts all of his rounds with "aVe". and "vAlE", however, if he started all his rounds with an argument, that would not mean the first round was just for acceptance. My opponent even admitted that he added a "greeting" as part of his "acceptance". Well, using that logic, I could just say that I can add an "argument" as part of my "acceptance".

If I said "first round for acceptance" then Con could have gotten away with it, but I said "first round just for acceptance". My rules were specific, I said:

"first round is JUST for acceptance"

Since my opponent added a "greeting" on top of the "acceptance", then he self-evidently Broke *Rule 3.

Also, he claims that even if my argument above holds, that only means he should lose the debate, that does not mean he will. However, Rule 1 claims that he will. This means he broke Rule 5 by contesting Rule 1. Rule 5 is:

"Rule 5: No contesting a rule after the debate has been accepted"

However, Rule 1 specifically states that failure to break the rules will result in an automatic forfeit. Since my opponent is arguing that failure to break the rules wouldn't result in an automatic forfeit, this means he is arguing against Rule 1 after the debate as been accepted, and thus has broken Rule 5. Regardless, one must invoke the principle of charity(http://en.wikipedia.org...). This means that I have a right to trust that people will vote for me based on honesty, because the debate rules specifically state that my opponent will forfeit all 7 points if he breaks any rules. We have no reason to think that voters will be dishonest with themselves based on the principle of charity here, even if it is possible. My opponent has broken 2 of the rules that I have mentioned already (*Rule 3 and Rule 5). Con also broke *Rule 4!!

How did Con break *Rule 4? Here is from his last round:

"alSo"

He has two lowercase letters beside each other (a lower case "a" and a lower case "l"), that means that every other letter is not a capital letter! My opponent has no escape route here. He broke *Rule 4.

My opponent broke 3 of the debate rules (*Rule 3, *Rule 4, and Rule 5). Thus, according to Rule 1:

"Rule 1: If a rule is broken (directly or indirectly), then an automatic 7 point forfeit results for whoever broke the rule"

...He forfeits all 7 points. If he disagrees, then he violates Rule 5 again! I trust that the voters will do the right thing, and give my all 7 points. Vote Pro.




JonathanCrane

Con

JonathanCrane forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

My opponent broke the rules, and thus forfeits all 7 points. Thank you.
JonathanCrane

Con

JonathanCrane forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by JonathanCrane 3 years ago
JonathanCrane
I have no idea where this is going, and it was dicey to accept this.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 3 years ago
johnlubba
Rational_Thinker9119JonathanCraneTied
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: FF
Vote Placed by amey 3 years ago
amey
Rational_Thinker9119JonathanCraneTied
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: pro wins this debate hands down since con posted some rubbish arguments and also withdrew from two rounds.