The Instigator
gahbage
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points
The Contender
revleader5
Con (against)
Losing
16 Points

Posting all of one's arguments in their opening round provides for a more fair debate.

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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 902 times Debate No: 4301
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (10)

 

gahbage

Pro

Argument: A contention or point made as evidence for PRO or CON.

Opening Round: The round where a debater's first argument is made.

Fair: free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice; without irregularity or unevenness (from dictionary.com)

Point 1: When a contender accepts a debate, it is instinct to assume that the arguments provided by instigator in his opening round are all the evidence that is being used to either be in support or disapproval of the resolution. If this is true, both debaters have the rest of the debate to argue over those set points. This lets both debaters better elaborate and expand their arguments, among other things. However, if the instigator were to spread his arguments over multiple rounds, the contender would have less time to elaborate on his original point, because the more rounds there are, the more elaboration there will be on later points.
revleader5

Con

Ladies and gentlemen, how can you listen to this man when he himself isn't following his own ideas? Notice how he puts "Point 1". Is he only going to use 1 point for his entire argument. Just one point and the rest of it he'll be fighting what I say? He is being a non-believer in his own cause.

Also let me cite a few cases where he debated someone and he presented his arguments in stages and didn't put them all in the first round.
Case 1- http://www.debate.org...
Case 2- http://www.debate.org...
Case 3- http://www.debate.org...
Case 4- http://www.debate.org...

I could go on, and I probably should, but I won't. I can always go back to those.

Two more things and I'll wrap it up. I wouldn't want to present my whole argument in the first round...

1. What fun is it to lay it all out there the first round and then for the rest of it just keep on saying, you're wrong, no you're wrong.

2. You can't think of everything at once. One thing your opponent says might trigger something in your brain to say a certain thing. You can't expect someone to leave it all out.
Debate Round No. 1
gahbage

Pro

More on my opponent's opening paragraph later. First, I'll refute his points.

"Also let me cite a few cases where he debated someone and he presented his arguments in stages and didn't put them all in the first round."

I will examine these debates.

"Case 1- http://www.debate.org...;

This debate has not concluded yet, but I can still bring something to your attention: The point I introduced in round 2 is merely a rebuttal of my opponent's points. These arguments are elaborations on my refutation.

The same is true for all four of the given debates, except number 3: "Case 3- http://www.debate.org...;

Examining my opponent's argument, you can see that he introduces more points as the debate progresses. For example, round 2 he brings up an argument about nuclear power and hybrid energy, and round 3 he brings up an argument about hydrogen power and how global warming is a giant scam, and finally brings up the predictions of scientists that could be cited in round 1. This gave me a slight problem in which I had to fully refute 3 rounds worth of arguments.

"1. What fun is it to lay it all out there the first round and then for the rest of it just keep on saying, you're wrong, no you're wrong."

There is a bigger chance of a forfeit, it lets you have more room and time to think over the resolution and your argument, and it lets you bring in more evidence, to name a few. Plus, I didn't say it was funner, I said it would be more fair.

"2. You can't think of everything at once. One thing your opponent says might trigger something in your brain to say a certain thing. You can't expect someone to leave it all out."

That was the case in the debates you showed. In addition, when you start a debate, you should have in mind all the evidence and arguments you have in order to support your claim. You may even want to anticipate your opponent's possible rebuttals.

"Notice how he puts "Point 1". Is he only going to use 1 point for his entire argument. Just one point and the rest of it he'll be fighting what I say? He is being a non-believer in his own cause."

Actually, I'm doing the opposite. Behold, point 2! *evil laugh*

Using multiple rounds to post an argument (or multiple arguments) can alter the thinking of the opponent. It also gives less space to type a rebuttal. Continually piling arguments on top of one another can lead to a forced failure to post a decent rebuttal, if any. For example, if I recall, my opening argument was relatively short. However, as of this word, I have 5490 characters remaining. That's a little over 66%, which knocks away 1/3 of my argument. In order to expand upon this idea AND my previous one, I may take up to 2/3. Now consider an argument my opponent may introduce later, or one I may introduce, and I might exceed the character limit. This forces me to underdevelop my argument. Thus being unfair to me. Of course, the same may happen to my opponent, but either way, it is unfair.
revleader5

Con

" "Notice how he puts "Point 1". Is he only going to use 1 point for his entire argument. Just one point and the rest of it he'll be fighting what I say? He is being a non-believer in his own cause."

Actually, I'm doing the opposite. Behold, point 2! *evil laugh*

Using multiple rounds to post an argument (or multiple arguments) can alter the thinking of the opponent. It also gives less space to type a rebuttal. Continually piling arguments on top of one another can lead to a forced failure to post a decent rebuttal, if any. For example, if I recall, my opening argument was relatively short. However, as of this word, I have 5490 characters remaining. That's a little over 66%, which knocks away 1/3 of my argument. In order to expand upon this idea AND my previous one, I may take up to 2/3. Now consider an argument my opponent may introduce later, or one I may introduce, and I might exceed the character limit. This forces me to underdevelop my argument. Thus being unfair to me. Of course, the same may happen to my opponent, but either way, it is unfair. "

Interesting, you're doing the opposite, no you're not, you're doing exactly as I said you would.

So anyway, it is not fair for a debate to be limited to new ideas only in the first round. This would provide for a boring, non-explosive argument. A debate is won by bringing up irrefutablr facts and by destroying your opponent's facts. Limiting this to the first round is nearly impossible.

Why, you ask? Well simply because in some cases, to destroy your opponent's argument, you have to bring up something new. Without new ideas, you can't argue certain parts of your opponent's arguments, this provides for a pretty unfair debate, wouldn't you agree?
Debate Round No. 2
gahbage

Pro

"Interesting, you're doing the opposite, no you're not, you're doing exactly as I said you would."

"Is he only going to use 1 point for his entire argument. Just one point and the rest of it he'll be fighting what I say? He is being a non-believer in his own cause."

The second quote is all you said about the idea of me providing more arguments. So I'm not sure "what you said you [I] would" is.

My opponent's point in this round is not important. I am not advocating the limiting of backup to round 1; I am merely stating that if all arguments were provided round 1, it would be more fair than if additional arguments were introduced later. So my opponent's point doesn't really support his position, or oppose mine.

Now on to my final point. Introducing a point in the final round of a debate can set a predicament for the opponent: He only has one chance to respond. This forces a longer cram of rebuttals into this last round, along with other rebuttals or points he may need to provide. This not only takes up more space (forcing a reduction of ideas used) but has the opponent stretch their focus to a wider range of topics. However, this can backfire on the other debater, considering how if the opponent makes a convincing argument he has no way to respond. Either way, it is more unfair to one side. Also, remember that some people introduce points in the last overall round, so there is no chance to respond to them.

You can plainly see that our round 2 arguments were longer than our round 1 arguments. And this argument would be longer than my round 2; however, my previous points and rebuttals remain uncontested, so all I can do is to uphold them. If my opponent picks up these arguments next round and responds to this argument while upholding his own points, he will use more characters than he did last round. Now, if we were debating about a more controversial issue, if he were to be in round 3 will the situation I have provided (introducing a new point each round), he would have a large chance of running out of characters.

So, reasons why you should vote PRO:

1. It would be unfair to the opponent if more and more arguments pile up as the debate continues.

2. My opponent has dropped my point from round 2.

3. My opponent has dropped my rebuttal from round 2.

4. My opponent has not provided any reasons to support his case/disprove me.
revleader5

Con

revleader5 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
Tru dat. 25 characters...
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
Nah, alot of people vote merely to get a rise out of the person who won.
Posted by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
I love how he got a vote. Hooray for stupidity and bias!
Posted by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
Exactly. haha

25 characters
Posted by Rezzealaux 8 years ago
Rezzealaux
I agree that it's fair. I don't agree that it's better :P
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by gahbage 8 years ago
gahbage
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Sweatingjojo 8 years ago
Sweatingjojo
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by slayer54321 8 years ago
slayer54321
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by dairygirl4u2c 8 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by revleader5 8 years ago
revleader5
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by LakevilleNorthJT 8 years ago
LakevilleNorthJT
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by bexy_kelly 8 years ago
bexy_kelly
gahbagerevleader5Tied
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