The Instigator
tom1997
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Nirvana or Soundgarden. Which is better?

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  
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: 4/5/2011 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,426 times Debate No: 15810
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

tom1997

Pro

Which band is better, Nirvana or Soundgarden? This is my first debate so I am challenging the only person on this site who I know. The title is pretty easy to understand. As pro, I will argue that Nirvana is a better band and socialpinko will argue that Soundgarden is a better band. My only rule is no semantics. I don't know how one would do that it's better to be safe than sorry. Good luck to socialpinko!
socialpinko

Con

As you have the BOP I will leave it to you to begin this debate and provide your opening arguments. Round 1 will be for definitions, clarifications, and rules. Below I will list a few rules that I hope we can abide by.

Rules

1.)Semantic arguments

2.)No personal attacks or insults

3.)Forfeits

Any violation of these rules will result in an automatic loss of all seven points.

Definitions

Nirvana: Nirvana was an American rock band that was formed by singer/guitarist Kurt Cobain and bassist Krist Novoselic in Aberdeen, Washington in 1987.

Soundgarden: Soundgarden is an American rock band formed in Seattle, Washington in 1984 by lead singer Chris Cornell, lead guitarist Kim Thayil, and bassist Hiro Yamamoto.

I now await my opponent's opening arguments. Good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
tom1997

Pro

Nirvana is clearly a better band. They have a better sound, they had to do more to get where they are than soundgarden. Nirvana also plays louder than soundgarden. The embers of soundgarden are just lazy, pot smoking, good for nothing musicians who play such terrible music it's hard to stand.
I hope you've enjoyed reading my argument. Good luck with yours

socialpinko

Con

My opponent has laid out a few arguments for Nirvana's superiority and I will list them below and proceed to refute them.

1.//"They have a better sound"//

This first point is purely subjective and should not be used in my opponent's favor. He has not shown objectively why Nirvana has a better sound than Soundgarden

2.//"they had to do more to get where they are than soundgarden."//

This is an unsubstantiated claim. It is also demonstratably falsifiable. Soundgarden was formed in 1984 and did not gain widespread popularity until 1994 with the release of 'Superknown'.[1] The members of Soundgarden were playing hard for ten years before all their hard work payed off.

Nirvana on the other hand was formed in 1987 and gained widespread popularity in 1991 with the release of 'Nevermind'.[2] The members of Nirvana were only playing for four years before they hit it big. Soundgarden was playing for six years longer.

3.//"Nirvana also plays louder than soundgarden."//

Again, an unsubstantiated claim. First, where is the evidence that Nirvana played louder than Soundgarden? Second, why does louder automatically equal better?

4.//"The [m]embers of soundgarden are just lazy, pot smoking, good for nothing musicians who play such terrible music it's hard to stand."//(sic)

This violates the rule which I laid out in the first round which states that there would be no personal attacks or insults. My opponent never brought any grievance against these rules and thus they will apply. These attacks while not helping my opponent's case should also result in my opponent automatically losing all 7 points.

As I mentioned in the first round, my opponent holds the BOP and my opponent did not object to this. My opponent has not upheld his BOP and thus I urge a Con vote.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2]http://en.wikipedia.org...(band)
Debate Round No. 2
tom1997

Pro

I did do my BOP thing i told you why i was right.
socialpinko

Con

//"I did do my BOP thing i told you why i was right."//

My opponent has not responded to the problems that I brought to his argument and therefore we may assume that he has conceded them. To voters, I urge a Con vote.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
tom1997socialpinkoTied
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 fails to respond to Con's counter-arguments.
Vote Placed by RougeFox 6 years ago
RougeFox
tom1997socialpinkoTied
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- BOP means "Burden of Proof". It essentially means that you are making the claim and thus must back it up sufficiently with evidence and logic. You did not do this effectively. Further, in order to uphold this burden, you must respond to his attacks against your arguments. You absolutely must defend your arguments. That is what the third round is for. Just because you make a claim, doesn't mean it stands, that is why it is a debate. Good luck in the future. Also, no attacks. Con, good job.