The Instigator
funnybrad333
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
Apprentice
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

RESOLVED: Pointing out typos or mispronunciations should not be considered in Rating a 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 1 vote the winner is...
funnybrad333
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/18/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 941 times Debate No: 5461
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

funnybrad333

Pro

Although proper grammar and speech is fundamental to life and debate, the whole purpose of debate is to weigh substance against substance, to see who you agree with or who provided more logical substance.

It seems like debate has become who can structure more redundant, grammatically correct sentences in a row with a flair of haughtiness; this is exactly the opposite of what Debate was intended to do.

On Debate.org, I have made typos (which you should be able to fix at a later time) such as "arguement (sic)". Is it necessary to point that out? Obviously I meant "argument", yet they point it out as if it was a disgusting tumor on my arguments face.

The problem I have though is not with the actual act of pointing it out, as it is nice to correct my vocabulary.
People should not be able to judge a debate based on mispronunciations or typos.
Apprentice

Con

My respects to funnybrad333 for raising the question that is doubtless weighing down the minds of many others, and his elegant use of the phrase "flair of haughtiness".

My rebuttals:
Note that my opponent states that "typos and mispronunciations should not be considered in rating a debate". I contend that they always should be considered, even if just a very little. They reflect the participant's care in debating.

"It seems like debate has become who can structure more redundant, grammatically correct sentences in a row with a flair of haughtiness; this is exactly the opposite of what Debate was intended to do."
Quite the contrary, my idealistic friend. Debate has always been about the presentation of arguments, not wholly the "logical substance" of said arguments. It is hard for people to be convinced when you are taipeeng lyke dis. As such, spelling and grammar are essential elements in a debate. They convey meaning more accurately then do long spiels reminiscent of 3rd gr
Debate Round No. 1
funnybrad333

Pro

" They reflect the participant's care in debating."

How does one's intelligence and vocabulary represent the care and attention one puts into a argument.

"Debate has always been about the presentation of arguments, not wholly the "logical substance" of said arguments."

Debate's original purpose was to solve disputes. The debate should be valued on substance, not style.

" It is hard for people to be convinced when you are taipeeng lyke dis[sic]. As such, spelling and grammar are essential elements in a debate. They convey meaning more accurately then do long spiels[sic] reminiscent of 3rd gr"

Thank you for proving my point. I was going to touch on the difference between a comprehensible and an incomprehensible typo. Your first typo and second typo were easily understood, and did not detract from my evaluation of your argument. If they detracted at all, it was as much as spreading diminishes my understanding in policy debate.

Vote Pro for the sake of proper debate.
Apprentice

Con

Apprentice forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Sweatingjojo 8 years ago
Sweatingjojo
Do you mean the grammar and spelling check box? Do you wish for it to not be included?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
funnybrad333ApprenticeTied
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