The Instigator
Rational_Thinker9119
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
EndarkenedRationalist
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

My Opponent Will Lose This Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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...
Rational_Thinker9119
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/22/2014 Category: Games
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,028 times Debate No: 49714
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (33)
Votes (5)

 

Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

-- In this debate, the cards will be stacked against Con. If Con accepts, it means that he also accepts the rules by default; no contesting a rule after accepting the debate --

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

Rule 2: Rules with a * directly 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 capital 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). This rule must be applied to each line individually, and my opponent can chose as many lines as he choses.

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

Have fun, it should be entertaining ha
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

i AcCePt.
Debate Round No. 1
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

Nobody has broken any rules yet, so it is still anybody's game. The reason I think Con will lose this debate, is that besides the rules outline, it is anybody's game. However, the cards are stacked against my opponent. Therefore, it is more likely that I will win than Con. Also, remember, even if Con follows every rule, that doesn't mean he wins automatically, it only means that he has dodged a definite loss. Another reason I think I will win this debate is that I am more experienced than my opponent. He only has 24 debates under his belt, I have 221. He may have a higher win percentage, but the majority of my debates have been complex philosophical, or scientific debates, while his debates are not on that caliber. Another reason I will win this debate is because I believe I am better looking than my opponent. This is suggested by the fact that I am confident enough to post a picture of myself as my DP, while his DP is of a frozen pond, which is probably a reflection of his cold love life. Another reason my opponent will lose this debate, is that if he wins, I will kill myself. I'm sure the voters don't want a man's blood on their hands, so because one is not compelled to automatically vote for Con, even if he follows all the rules, the voters will vote for me, as most people don't want an innocent person to die. Therefore, since I will kill myself if I lose, and most people are caring and sympathetic and don't want that to happen, they will vote for me, and I will win. Therefore, since I will win, it follows deductively that my opponent will lose. Thus, my opponent will lose this debate.

Also, I taught Chuck Norris the round house kick, and had the most interesting man in the world tell me I am the most interesting man in the world. A logician agreed, but he got fired. It is a shame really, as he was really bright.

last argument:

P1: If chicken Mcnuggets taste amazing, Con will lose the debate

P2: Chicken Mcnuggets are tasty as hell

C: Con will lose dawg!!
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

mY oPpOnEnT sTaTeS tHaT hE iS mOrE eXpErIeNcEd ThAn Me. TrUe. HoWeVeR, hE hAs AlSo BeEn HeRe LoNgEr.

hE hAs BeEn HeRe TwEnTy-FoUr MoNtHs To My FoUr. ThE dEaTh StAr HaS tWeNtY-fOuR zOnEs. ThUs My OpPoNeNt CaN bE cOmPaReD tO tHe DeAtH sTaR. tHaT mAkEs Me ThE rEbEl AlLiAnCe. We KnOw WhO wOn ThAt WaR.

i Am An UnDeRdOg. PeOpLe LoVe UnDeRdOgS.

mY oPpOnEnT sAyS hE lOoKs BeTtEr ThAn Me. HoW dO wE kNoW hIs PiCtUrE iS rEaL?

fUrThErMoRe, WeRe I tO pOsT a ReAl PiCtUrE, mAnY pEoPlE wOuLd LaPsE iNtO bLiNdNeSs.

mY iMaGe DePiCtS tHe MaJeStY oF qUeEn ElSa ThRoUgH hEr WoRk. ShE iS lOvElY. wHiLe My OpPoNeNt DiSpLaYs OnLy HiMsElF, i dIsPlAy BeAuTy, HaRmOnY, aNd EvEn A dEePeR rEfLeCtIoN oN tHe MeAnInGs Of LiFe.

aS a LaSt ReSoRt, My OpPoNeNt JoKeS aBoUt SeLf-HaRm. ThAt Is NoT a ToPiC tO bE tAkEn LiGhTlY.

iF mY oPpOnEnT fEeLs LiKe HuRtInG hImSeLf OvEr An InTeRnEt DeBaTe, I rEcOmMeNd He SeE a ThErApIsT.

aLsO, iF mY oPpOnEnT iS cOnFiDeNt EnOuGh To PoSt A sElF-pOrTrAiT, hE sHoUlD bE cOnFiDeNt EnOuGh To Be A gOoD sPoRt.

mY oPpOnEnT sAyS hE tAuGhT nOrRiS tHe RoUnDhOuSe KiCk. NoW hE's JuSt LyIng.

aCcOrDiNg To HiS pRoFiLe, My OpPoNeNt Is TwEnTy-SeVeN aNd In CaNaDa. NoRrIs Is SeVeNtY-fOuR aNd An AmErIcAn.

tHeReFoRe, ThE eArLiEsT pRo CoUlD hAvE tAuGhT nOrRiS wAs WhEn NoRrIs WaS fOrTy-SeVeN.

bEcAuSe NoRrIs WaS bOrN kNoWiNg ThE rOuNdHoUsE, iT iS iMpOsSibLe ThAT pRo TaUgHt HiM.

cHiCkEn NuGgEtS dO tAsTe AmAzInG. hOwEvEr, ThIs Is A rEd HeRrInG fAlLaCy. ThE sYlLoGiSm Is VaNqUiShEd.

gOoD vOtErS, mY oPpOnEnT hAs LiEd To YoU. hE iS aLsO fRoM cAnAdA, sO vOtInG fOr HiM iS bOtH uNpAtRiOtIc AnD tReAsOnOuS.

i LoOk FoRwArD tO tHe NeXt RoUnD!
Debate Round No. 2
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

I use Opera web browser with normal size font. As you can see, when using this search engine, the third line of my opponent's round starts with a capitol letter. I pressed prtsc to prove it [http://postimg.org...]. The third line starts with a capital "C", when the rules specifically state every line (not sentence), must start with a lower case letter. Therefore, Con loses and a full 7 points goes to me. When I used Google Chrome, and the forth line started with "War", which, again, starts with a capitol letter.

Now, perhaps there are some web browsers which shows that he didn't break the rules with respect to that format. However, he still broke the rules with respect to Google Chrome and Opera on their default settings. Therefore, he still broke the rules in some sense indirectly, which rule 1 states is forbidden. Even if, lets say, Internet Explorer favors my opponent, that wouldn't change the fact that he broke the rules on the other browsers, thus, he still broke the rules. Therefore, he will lose according to the debate structure.

Thank you.
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

oH. tHiS iS hOw It Is.

wElL tHeN. i AdMiT tHeRe ApPeArS tO bE aN eRrOr. HoWeVeR, tHeRe Is NoT.

iN aLl DeBaTeS, tHe FiRsT fEw LiNeS sTaRt WiTh ThE iMaGe Of PrO oR cOn. ThIs ChAnGeS tHe FoRmAt.

lOoK aT iT fRoM mY pErSpEcTiVe.





nOtIcE wHeRe ThE "c" Is.

bEcAuSe I aM tHe OnE fOlLoWiNg ThE rUlEs, NoT mY oPpOnEnT, tHeY mUsT bE bRoKeN fRoM mY pErSpEcTiVe.

tHeY wErE nOt.

tHe ArGuMeNt AbOuT wEb BrOwSeRs Is DiSiNgEnOuS. fRoM a MoBiLe, My ArGuMeNtS aRe EvErYwHeRe.

lIkE i CaNnOt Be SuBjEcT tO tHe LaWs Of oThEr CoUnTrIeS, i CaNnOt Be SuBjEcT tO tHe RuLeS oF sItEs, BrOwSeRs, AnD dEvIcEs I dId NoT uSe.

i Am StIlL wItHiN tHe PaRaMeTeRs Of ThIs DeBaTe. ThE rUlEs Do NoT sPeCiFy A bRoWsEr. If MiNe StIlL oPeRaTeS wItHiN iT, tHeN i aM sTiLl WiThIn ThE rUlEs.

tHaNk YoU.



Debate Round No. 3
Rational_Thinker9119

Pro

Con says that because he is the one following the rules, then the rules only have to be broken from his perspective. Con hasn't even proven that from his perspective, he starts every line with a lower case letter in the actual debate, he only showed that this was the case for his "review debate" page, but the "review debate" page is completely irrelavent to the actual debate that is taking place.
Con also broke a rule last round, as every other letter is not a lower case letter with a capitol letter in between!
Rule 4 states:
"In every round, every other letter must be a capital letter, with the remaining letters being lower case letters.."
However, Con posted:
"tHe ArGuMeNt AbOuT wEb BrOwSeRs Is DiSiNgEnOuS. fRoM a MoBiLe, My ArGuMeNtS aRe EvErYwHeRe.

lIkE i CaNnOt Be SuBjEcT tO tHe LaWs Of oThEr CoUnTrIeS"
As you can see, the lower case "e" on the end of EvErYwHeRe is followed by a lower case "l" on the next line. Since he has two lower case letters back to back, then I will win. He should have ended the first line I quoted with a capitol letter so he could start the next one with a lower case letter and still be within the rules.
Since every other letter is not a lower case letter, with a capitol letter in between. GAME OVER.
Also, if the rules aren't broken from his perspective, that would only show that he didn't break a rule directly with respect to him. However, he still broke the rule indirectly, as the debate clearly shows that Con did not start off each line with a lower case letter with respect to some users. The rules state that a rule cannot even be broken, even indirectly.
Rule 1 states:
"Rule 1: If a rule is broken (directly or indirectly)..."
Therefore, even if Con didn't break a rule from his direct prespecive, he still broke the rules indirectly even if the rules didn't specify a browser.
Con also broke the rules, as his fifth line has a picture, and doesn't start with a lower case letter!

Checkmate ;)
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

i WiLl ReTuRn To ThE rEvIeW dEbAtE iN a MoMeNt.

a MoMeNt.

a MoMeNt.

tHe LoWeR cAsE mY oPpOnEnT pOiNtS oUt WaS oN a NeW lInE aNd HaD tO bE lOwEr.

mY oPpOnEnT's CaSe Is InVaLiD.

a PiCtUrE wAs NoT sPeCiFiEd. It CaNnOt Be AgAiNsT tHe RuLeS.

pLuS, tHe FiRsT lEtTeR iN tHe PiCtUrE iN tHe RoUnD iS lOwErCaSe.

nOw BaCk To ThE rEvIeW dEbAtE.

fIrSt, ThE rUlE wAs NoT bRoKeN iN iTs EnTiReTy.

i DeMoNsTrAtEd ThAt I dId NoT bReAk A rUlE. iF aNyThInG, dEbAtE dOt OrG bRoKe A rUlE.

hOwEvEr, I aM nOt DeBaTe DoT oRg. I cAnNoT bE rEsPoNsIbLe FoR wHaT tHeY dO.

tHuS i BrOkE nO rUlEs, DiReCtLy Or InDiReCtLy.

iN tHe WoRdS oF qUeEn ElSa: LeT iT gO, lEt It Go!
Debate Round No. 4
33 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Darn, ER was so close to winning! It's a shame he broke the rules.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
Thanks, whiteflame! Just one little mistake. Ugh! Oh, well. Plenty more debates in the cyber-sea. :)
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
:P indeed, nice try by the way, man. A worthy try, for certain.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
@whiteflame

You're not alone, my friend.
Posted by Rational_Thinker9119 2 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119
The best tactic to not lose this debate is to keep the rounds short. When the rounds are long, it increases the chances that a slip up will be made.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
My ears (eyes?) are burning.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
If we ever do it again (something I will not promise), I won't lose.

But yes. Magic is right. I made that one mistake, I admit it. Rational Thinker deserves to win this one.
Posted by Rational_Thinker9119 2 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119
"Honestly, I thought I had a chance up until magic pointed that out."

You did... Again, great job anyway. I have had 5 debates with the same resolution now, and you clearly did the best out of all of them.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
I tried my best. I think trying to argue an entire case afterwards seemed a little dishonest, but that's just me. I at least typed 'I accept' accurately. :)

Honestly, I thought I had a chance up until magic pointed that out.
Posted by Rational_Thinker9119 2 years ago
Rational_Thinker9119
Maybe I was wrong about whiteflame's bias, man, now I feel like a dick!
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by kbub 2 years ago
kbub
Rational_Thinker9119EndarkenedRationalistTied
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: I'm changing my vote. ER was not able to follow the rules, and left little choice accept to give Pro the points. RT won the arguments and therefore won the full 7 points.
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 2 years ago
funwiththoughts
Rational_Thinker9119EndarkenedRationalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Con had a good case but dropped it for claims that Con broke the rules, when I agree that Con shouldn't be subject to perspectives other than his own.
Vote Placed by mrsatan 2 years ago
mrsatan
Rational_Thinker9119EndarkenedRationalistTied
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: Con accepted the challenge, and as such, also accepted the rules the challenge is dictated by. Con claims that it is his own perspective that matters, but ultimately it does not. What matters is the perspective of the voters, and my browser shows 11 of Cons lines (and that just in round 2) in which the first letter is not lowercase. Con simply wasn't up for the challenge.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
Rational_Thinker9119EndarkenedRationalistTied
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: Much as I dislike the setup for this debate, Pro won it. Con did an admirable job trying to keep up with them, but it wasn't perfect. Unfortunately, an imperfect job results in a loss.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 2 years ago
Magic8000
Rational_Thinker9119EndarkenedRationalistTied
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: When Con said "LaWs Of oThEr" he had a lowercase f next to a lowercase o. I don't know why people are voting against Pro. It's not like someone forced Con to accept, when Con accepted, he accepts the rules.