The Instigator
Brainmaster
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
medic0506
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

My opponent has just lost the game.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,041 times Debate No: 17000
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (8)

 

Brainmaster

Pro

According to Wikipedia:

The Game is a mental game where the objective is to avoid thinking about The Game itself. Thinking about The Game constitutes a loss.

The rules:

1.Everyone in the world is playing The Game. (Sometimes narrowed to: "Everybody in the world who knows about The Game is playing The Game",[4] or alternatively, "You are always playing The Game.") A person cannot not play The Game; it does not require consent to play and one can never stop playing.
2.Whenever one thinks about The Game, one loses.
3.Losses must be announced to at least one person[6] (either by using a statement such as "I Lost The Game" or by alternative means).

You cannot not play the game. You are always playing.

You go next CON.
medic0506

Con

Thanks to pro for this debate.

I couldn't have just lost the game. I became aware of The Game when I began to read a debate between Pro, and OreEle. At that point, I began thinking about it and thus lost. I even said to my wife, "I just lost the game". I finished voting on their debate, then asked Brain to give me a shot, accepted the challenge, and here we are. All those events took awhile, and I was thinking about the game the entire time, so I couldn't "un-lose". The resolution states that I "just" lost the game, but as you can see I lost quite a while ago. Therefore, the resolution has been refuted.

I look forward to pro's reply.
Debate Round No. 1
Brainmaster

Pro

You cannot be always thinking about the game. And infact, you just lost the game on an identically themed debate. And you re-lost on this debate.

Your argument is invalid.
medic0506

Con

Thanks to pro for a quick response.

I'm not "always" thinking about the game, but I had been the entire time, since learning about it, thus becoming a participant.

Pro's argument serves to prove my point. He says, "... you just lost the game on an identically themed debate. And you re-lost on this debate." He's absolutely correct. I had "just" lost the game when I began reading the other debate. He says that I re-lost on this debate, but the resolution has nothing to do with "re-losing", it says "just lost". "Just", as used in the resolution, implies at this instant. By his own argument, the resolution is negated.

Pro states that my argument is invalid, but does not show that it violates any of the rules that were agreed on. Therefore, it should be extended.

I look forward to the next round.
Debate Round No. 2
Brainmaster

Pro

Thanks for the reply.

Since you admit that you are thinking about the game, you were "just" losing the game then, and you are still "just" losing the game now.

Thank you.
medic0506

Con

Thanks again for the quick reply.

Pro says, "Since you admit that you are thinking about the game, you were "just" losing the game then, and you are still "just" losing the game now."

With this argument, pro is attempting to alter the resolution, in an attempt to create a "no lose" situation for himself. The resolution clearly states, "My opponent has just lost the game". "Just", meaning at that instant. With "just" being there, and being used as it is, changing the word "lost", to "losing" is grammatically incorrect, and alters the resolution, therefore I ask that this argument be invalidated.

In round 3 pro concedes my earlier arguments, in favor of this attempted change, therefore I ask that they be considered valid. In light of his concession, and invalid attempt to change the resolution, I ask for a vote for con.

Thanks to Brainmaster for the challenge.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by medic0506 5 years ago
medic0506
You added the three rules from wikipedia in this debate, that weren't there in the other one.
Thanks for the debate and good luck to you.
Posted by Brainmaster 5 years ago
Brainmaster
I'm not even sure what I did.
Posted by medic0506 5 years ago
medic0506
Brain, I thought I had you when I asked for a shot. Unfortunately, you closed that loophole with the new rules for this one. Smart move.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
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: Con did not "JUST" lose the game. Nice going there!
Vote Placed by bsh1 3 years ago
bsh1
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Nice semantics arguments by Con. Very amusing.
Vote Placed by Mestari 4 years ago
Mestari
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
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: Medic did not "just" lose the game. Shoot... I just lost the game.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
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: Ingenious use of grammar and semantics to counter Pro's case from Medic.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Pro just kept repeating the same thing over and over and never really countered Con's argument.
Vote Placed by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con is right. The resolution at the start is clear and if he had already lost, then he was already a looser when the debate started so he could not have "just lost". Pro just tried to reiterate the rules and had no counter.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never attacks Con's argument but repeats the OP and ignores the tense. 2:0 Con
Vote Placed by petersaysstuff 5 years ago
petersaysstuff
Brainmastermedic0506Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Well done! Con won because Pro proved his [Con's] point as well as the argument about "just". I was impressed.