The Instigator
Perseus
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Oryus
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Oryus is a Thief and the Debate.org Voters are Forgers

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 5 votes the winner is...
Oryus
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/9/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,120 times Debate No: 23515
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (7)
Votes (5)

 

Perseus

Pro

My opponent is a female. All females who accept this debate must agree to the definitions I provide. My opponent will also agree to not use semantics. Everything on this debate must be on topic. No posting nonsense or off-topic arguments or ideas.

A thief is someone who steals something.

A forgerer is someone who does something with the intent to deceive.

My opponent is a thief. She used semantics to steal my victory in this debate. The resolution was clearly true.

The voters are forgers. They did something (voted) with the intent to deceive (to make it seem like I lost the debate).

In conclusion, Oryus is a thief and a troll.

http://www.debate.org...
Oryus

Con

I thank Pro for challenging me to this undoubtedly intriguing debate and wish him the very best of luck.

I agree to the terms of this debate. I notice that the purposes of the first and second rounds have not been stated. I will take it upon myself to assume the intentions of Pro. I will present my opening argument here in the first round and preemptively counter the points of Pro who clearly has the burden of proof.

Pro firstly asserts that I am a thief. His evidence is that I "used semantics to steal (his) victory in this debate." But I had not yet put forth an entry in this debate, so Pro could not have known whether I would use semantics in it. Also, I have clearly agreed to the terms and therefore will not use semantics in this debate (read my agreement above^). Directly after this, he states that "the resolution was clearly true." Here he uses the past tense form of the word "is." It is slightly annoying that Pro is switching tenses all willy nilly. In fact, I am beginning to suspect that he himself is using semantics in an attempt to win this debate. I ask voters to keep this in mind.

Regardless of this blatant dishonesty, I press on.

I assume Pro is referring to the debate titled "An 800 meter race is longer in terms of length than a 400 meter race," which he has an unexplained link for at the bottom of his opening argument: http://www.debate.org...

In that debate, I made a concise argument for my position. Whether I used semantics is really a moot point. The fact that I used semantics does not automatically mean that I stole his victory. I can prove this with three simple points:

1.) Semantics=/=stealing
2.) The victory was not in his possession to begin with therefore, I could not have stolen it from him if I tried.
3.) The victory is in nobody's possession even now because as of the time of this debate challenge, the debate titled "An 800 meter race is longer in terms of length than a 400 meter race" is still in it's voting period. Victory has yet to be won or stolen.

"The resolution was clearly true."

The resolution was not clearly true and I showed this with my argument in that debate. I see no need to contest this further. Voters are welcome to read the debate and see that I am, in fact, winning (though I haven't won just yet). It is gracious of me to counter this point as this is an extraneous detail and has little if anything to do with the stated resolution. This extraneous detail breaks the terms Pro himself has laid out.

Pro also asserts that the voters on that debate are forgers who "(voted) with the intent to deceive (to make it seem like [he] lost the debate)."

They did not deceive. They gave clear and honest reasons for their decisions and I think it is safe to assume that they were all quite honest in their RFD's.
They did not vote for me to make it *seem like* you lost the debate. They literally voted for me to make you lose the debate. That is the voters power. There was no deception or forgery involved in the voting process of that debate. Each voter gave a clear RFD and the fact that they gave me votes doesn't just make it *seem like* you're losing. I *am* in fact winning due specifically to the power of their votes and you are, in fact, losing. It doesn't simply seem to be that way. It just *is* that way- no deception necessary. In conclusion: Ultimately, it is up to voters who wins a debate. They voted for me and I am winning.

Also, you assert in the resolution that "Debate.org voters are forgers." Since you did not put a qualifier, I am inclined to believe you are accusing each and every debate.org voter of being a forger. I look forward to hearing your evidence for this as this information will surely shake DDO to it's very core. If you were expecting people to assume you meant "some" voters or "voters on my debate with Oryus" then this would be different- but you still cannot prove this. Their RFD's are out in the open for all to see.

"In conclusion, Oryus is a thief and a troll."

In this debate:
http://www.debate.org...

I showed that I am not, in fact, a troll. This is an unsubstantiated claim which has nothing to do with the stated resolution. I assert that Pro has, again, broken his own terms by stating an off-topic claim.

Conclusion:
I have clearly shown why I did not steal a victory which never was in the possession of Pro to begin with. In addition, I showed that Pro has broken his own terms by using semantics and adding extraneous material which isn't relevant to this debate. I contend that Pro will not be able to prove that all (or even some of) Debate.org voters are forgers. He will not be able to prove that the victory was in his possession, that semantics=stealing, or that I'm a thief.

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 1
Perseus

Pro

The word Oryus means Thief. Vote Pro.
Oryus

Con

"The word Oryus means Thief. Vote Pro."

Oryus is a word I made up.

Vote Con <3
Debate Round No. 2
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by makhdoom5 4 years ago
makhdoom5
indeed mostly here are atheist or agnostic.
i cant verify my account.
as my country is not in the list.
any body has his own perception.
and use that.
logic or reality is in the hole.
Posted by Oryus 5 years ago
Oryus
hehe the infamous imabench has voted on my troll debate. It is an honor, sir.

And thank you again Chrysippus ^_^
Posted by Chrysippus 5 years ago
Chrysippus
I am very proud. This debate makes me ten kinds of proud.
Posted by Oryus 5 years ago
Oryus
wanna debate that?
Posted by Perseus 5 years ago
Perseus
AWESOMENESS TROLLED THIS VOTE!

adfa
Posted by Oryus 5 years ago
Oryus
Thanks Chryssipus! You are one of the very few people who have given me pointers on debating so you should be proud of my clearly superior debating skills! ^_^
Posted by Chrysippus 5 years ago
Chrysippus
Awesome round, Oryrus.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
PerseusOryusTied
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 needs to just let it go.
Vote Placed by Koopin 5 years ago
Koopin
PerseusOryusTied
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: Kfc
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 5 years ago
Chrysippus
PerseusOryusTied
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 crushed Pro with semantics, and his response was terribly weak. Arguments clearly go to Con.
Vote Placed by thett3 5 years ago
thett3
PerseusOryusTied
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:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Debate.org is a source that can be upheld to the utmost scrutiny and still be considered valid and correct
Vote Placed by awesomeness 5 years ago
awesomeness
PerseusOryusTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: troll