The Instigator
KingDebater
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Pennington
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

My opponent doesn't know how to debate.

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...
Pennington
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,144 times Debate No: 33021
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (9)
Votes (5)

 

KingDebater

Pro

I argue that my opponent doesn't know how to debate. I will use this debate as a chance for him/her to prove otherwise.


Rules
1. Failure to obide by the rules will result in a 7-point loss. Viewers are encouraged to vote in the masses.
2. In this debate, it shall be assumed that if the opponent gives no arguments supporting his case in this debate, then (s)he therefore does not know how to debate.
3. Twisting the definitions of words that are fairly obvious is strictly forbidden.
4. The first round will be used by Con as a chance to accept the debate. Any part of Con's round 1 that isn't stating his acceptance shall be strictly forbidden.
5. The use of Pornography to bribe the poor little innocent voters into voting for them is strictly forbidden.
6. Persons with the capability to 'hack' this debate to alter it in any way that a normal person would not be able to do is strictly forbidden.
7. If a voter has to twist the definitions of words in order to give any reason for his voting, that vote shall be countered.
8. Using innapropriate or offensive language is strictly forbidden.
9. The use of catchy slogans to brainwash the voters into voting for yourself is strictly forbidden. For example, 'Vote for me or smell like pee!'.
10. It shall be accepted that the catchy (and modestly clever) slogan given as an example in the ninth rule does not violate the ninth rule and it therefore does not mean that Pro (Me, KingDebater) deserves a 7-point loss.
11. Con creating or abolishing rules is strictly forbidden.
12. Attempting to point out any 'flaws' or any 'unfairness' in the rules or this debate in general is strictly forbidden, and violates the fourth law.
13. Using snynonyms to attempt to get around rules such as the twelth rule is strictly forbidden.
14. When Con accepts the debate, (s)he understands that (s)he agrees to enter this 'debate' with me with all the rules in effect.



Pennington

Con

I accept because I know how to debate. I accept because I know how to follow debate guidelines. I accept because I have debated 20 debates and I have won 15. I accept because I like to debate. I accept because I like to win. I accept because I make strong arguments. I accept because this debate is short and has 500 characters. I accept because I negated the resolution. So, before I end I just wanted to say, I accept this debate Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
Again the voters will decide that.
Posted by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
(I accept) because I know how to debate. (I accept) because I know how to follow debate guidelines. (I accept) because I have debated 20 debates and I have won 15. (I accept) because I like to debate. (I accept) because I like to win. (I accept) because I make strong arguments. (I accept) because this debate is short and has 500 characters. (I accept) because I negated the resolution. So, before I end I just wanted to say, (I accept) this debate Pro.
Posted by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
Your 'argument' is stated as a reason for your acceptance. A reason for your acceptance is not reason for your acceptance, so therefore you're violating rule 4 and deserving a 7-point loss.
Posted by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
Did I make a argument? Did everything I say accept the debate?
Posted by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
Rule 4 states "The first round will be used by Con as a chance to accept the debate. Any part of Con's round 1 that isn't stating his acceptance shall be strictly forbidden."

A reason for your acceptance is not stating your acceptance.
Posted by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
If you made an argument, it is not acceptance as saying 'I accept' is not an argument supporting your case in this debate.
Posted by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
Notice that the only rules that apply to my argument is 2 and 4. I both accepted the argument in every sentence and also made a argument. I fulfilled all rules.
Posted by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
As I am aware, Pennington made no arguments. So, in accordance with the rules, he therefore does not know how to debate. Therefore, I win.

He said that he negated the resolution. If he did, he breaks the rules and therefore loses with a 7-point loss.

It looks like another win for the KingDebater.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Haha, this debate is B.S.

Rule 2 and Rule 4 conflict with each other so no matter what you are breaking a rule which breaks rule 14.

If you go by rule 2 you HAVE to post arguments supporting that you can debate, but rule 4 states that "Any part of Con's round 1 that isn't stating his acceptance shall be strictly forbidden."

This means if I go on about how I can debate then I am not strictly talking about my acceptance.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by effimero89 4 years ago
effimero89
KingDebaterPenningtonTied
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 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: I was going to vote all pro until he/she said the word "pee" (regardless of reference) violated his #8 rule
Vote Placed by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
KingDebaterPenningtonTied
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 made rules that made a debate impossible and were self-conflicting. But Con cleverly found a way around the rules. Regardless of that, even if Con broke a rule, Pro would never have been able to point it out, so Con wins.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
KingDebaterPenningtonTied
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 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: Pro's fourth rule states '4. The first round will be used by Con as a chance to accept the debate. Any part of Con's round 1 that isn't stating his acceptance shall be strictly forbidden.', however, he only made it a one round debate, meaning that the pro is the one who doesnt know how to debate
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
KingDebaterPenningtonTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: While pro has BoP, I see no arguments present from either side. I feel con managing to navigate those rules, is enough to give him conduct.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
KingDebaterPenningtonTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro as Instigator has the obligation to write an unambiguous resolution. Ambiguities in the rules are therefore a conduct violation. Pro made no argument in support of the resolution. It doesn't matter whether or not Con broke one of the rules, because Pro, in the debate, didn't argue that he did. Arguments in comments don't count.