Rap battles on DDO should be freestyled on the spot
Debate Rounds (4)
First round acceptance
Freestyling is like fighting where you deliver quick hits to end the battle. Freestyling in rap battles shows lyrical proficiency because you are able to instantly come up with disses just by looking at your opponent's picture, observing any and everything around you, dissing their name and reputation, and so on.
When your pumped up and have all of these inspirations and ideas in your head, that's the perfect moment to freestyle during a rap battle. Yes you can take your time and think of lyrics to use against your opponent, but as soon as you decide to walk away from the battle as you take a break, you lose focus and when that happens, your raps won't build enough momentum than if you had simply let bursts of creativity flow as you type.
For that reason, rap battles on DDO should follow the regular custom of freestyling lyrics. The only exception is if you are busy.
Thanks to Pro for instigating a debate on this topic.
The resolution is an affirmative statement to the effect that "rap battles on DDO should be freestyled on the spot." Consequently, the sole burden of proof will lie with Pro to affirm this statement beyond a reasonable doubt. While I will run arguments as to why this should not become the standard, as long as I am able to rebut Pro's case, you vote negative.
Pro states, "According to Wiki, rap battles are formally freestyled on the spot." He doesn't quote from the Wikipedia article at all to prove this, but even if it were the case, it is utterly irrelevant. He is stating what "is," but the resolution requires him to argue what "ought" to be. This doesn't at all advance his position.
Pro states, "Freestyling on the spot demonstrates that you can creatively rap about a diversity of things within seconds and use it to defeat your opponent." Again, this is a baseless assertion that he does not defend. He claims that freestyle demonstrates that you can rap "creatively" and about a "diverse range of things." Surely this is not the case. I could freestyle aimlessly, incoherently with nothing more than racial slurs. That doesn't demonstrate that I can rap about a diverse range of subjects -- rapping about a diverse range of subjects would show that, but in no way is that exclusive to freestyling, nor does freestyling itself demonstrate that. This point can be extended to normal rap battles where an extra time commitment allows rappers the time to refine their arguments, allowing for creativity to thrive by virtue of the fact that time, effort and commitment come into play.
Pro states, "Freestyling is like fighting where you deliver quick hits to end the battle." This, of course, doesn't prove his case because he doesn't prove that "delivering quick hits" is normatively or logically desirable.
Pro states, "Freestyling in rap battles shows lyrical proficiency...", but note that he has not demonstrated that merely being able to conjure up disses on the spot is a sign of lyrical profiency, nor has he demonstrated that this is exclusive to freestyling. Most important, he has not demonstrated why this point would lead us to the conclusion that all rap battles on DDO ought to be conducted in this way.
Pro states, "When your pumped up and have all of these inspirations and ideas in your head, that's the perfect moment to freestyle during a rap battle." He suggests that this view is universal, though this is hardly the case, as people learn differently and draw inspiration from different things, and some may need an external source of inspiration. Moreover, many people may be busy with other wordly things and not have time for these sorts of quick rap battles.
Pro states, "Yes you can take your time..but as soon as you decide to walk away from the battle as you take a break, you lose focus and when that happens, your raps won't build enough momentum than if you had simply let bursts of creativity flow as you type." He fails to substantiate the assertion that stepping away from a rap battle, or merely stepping away from one's computer, necessitates having lost focus. Moreover, he doesn't prove that one's rap, if constructed over a period of time, will not be capable of building enough momentum. There have been an assortment of rap battles conducted over DDO over a period of time from Mikal, Blade-of-Truth, and others  that were not "freestyles" that were quite well-done in both my and many other's opinions. Moreover, effectiveness is subjective, as is assessment of the adequacy of momentum. Pro attempts to establish a categorical basis by nothing more than assertion, and he has not proven his points in the slightest.
Pro then goes on to concede the debate by stating "[t]he only exception is if you are busy." Note that our resolution dealt with all rap battles on DDO being conducted via freestyle, not "all rap battles unless you're busy." Everyone is busy from time to time, and Pro concedes that this is an adequate reason to eschew this as a universal standard. As it stands, Pro has negated his own resolution.
I. People are Busy
Pro has already conceded this point in his opening arguments. Freestyling requires quick, rapid-fire rounds, and not everyone is capable of doing that due to time commitment, be it by virute of schoolwork, a job, family, etc., all of which are things much more important than a rap battle on DDO. This point alone is enough for you to vote neg.
II. Breeds Cheating
Freestyle rap battles can potentially give rise to cheating. Indeed, you would set the rounds to a short period of time -- perhaps 5 or 10 minutes -- but a sly cheater would wait to accept the debater until much later, in the process writing up his rap or even pulling a past rap he has written and saved, and proceed to fire off his pre-prepared material, giving him a significant and unfair advantage over his adversary who adhered to the rules of the battle. This completely undermines the entire basis of a freestyling battle, as stated by Pro. Your strength as a lyricist is not at all demonstrated if you had an extra half hour to prepare your raps. This system in fact encourages people to engage in deplorable behavior for the sake of salvaging reputation or ELO or gaining the upper hand in a grudge match.
III. Quality may take time
Pro fails to account for the fact that people learn and act differently, and for some, quality may take time, be it by virtue of personal issues in one's life (e.g., ADHD) or merely writer's block. If you wanted to engage in a scientific or philosophical rap battle , or even a rap battle about DDO history as Mikal and thett3 once did , you would likely need time to conduct research which significantly enhanced and provides a new dimension to the battle which would be virtually impossible if you were merely freestyling. Moreover, if this were to become the standard, rappers wouldn't be able to post videos with beats for their raps, as BOT and 9spaceking once did [Source 2]. More time allows people to come up with better, more refined and more interesting raps, as well as lengthier raps, which means more aggregate quality. In many cases, there is necessarily a trade-off between time and length and time and quality.
IV. Discourages Newer Rappers
There are a number of very prominent members, such as Mikal and BOT, who are known for their rapping skills and for their wins. They serve as role models for people who may be interested in rapping and want to hone their skills. However, being an amateur, as many are, necessarily requires that these newer rappers take time and devote an immense amount of effort into their rhymes. Thererefore, if raps were only to be conducted via freestyle, these newer members would be intimidated and likely refuse to participate. This would not only drive people away from the site and from an activity they could enjoy, but also give rise to a hierarchy where only a few people are considered "good" by DDO standards because, surely, practice makes perfect. Not everyone has had that practice, however.
V. Encourages Filler and Recklessness
When people are limited on time, they may resort to quantity over quality. You could come up with three great bars, but if you see that the timer is running out and you only have 60 seconds to submit, you may be inclined to throw in filler words, and profanities tend to come to mind. This not only significantly reduces the quality of the rap battles and diminishes the entire purpose of conducting raps -- to engage in an intellectual, enjoyable activity with competiting lyricists -- but reduces the quality of the site by setting a standard that this form of reckless behavior is acceptable.
VI. Increases the likelihood of Forfeiting
With freestyle, you would need to set the time limits between rounds to a short period of time. This would necessarily lead to an uptick in forfeiting, be it because of unexpected things coming up or simply the site lagging. A while back there was a rap battle between Mikal and Bobturner where Mikal, due to not having received a notification that his argument was due, forfeiting a round . This led his opponent to, overly arrogant that Mikal ahd dropped a round, to basically refuse to post a thorough rap for the next round, be it because he was content that he was going to win or because he simply wanted to run out the timer for a cheap win. This would necessarily reduce the quality of the site's rap battles.
VII. Disregards what DDO stands for
DDO stands for effort, dilligence and intelligent banter among great minds. This means that people are awarded for putting time and effort into their arguments, and often people need to devote hours to research in order to come up with the right refutations to their opponent's cases. This standard completely eschews that, not only undermining what DDO stands for and necessarily reducing the quality of the rap battles, but also setting a horrible standard for newer members.
VIII. Clogs the Site with Troll Battles
If the standard is that freestyle rap battles are acceptable, then newer members, or even "boosters," would be inclined to post up a flurry of them in order to boost their ELO. This would especially aid multi-accounting boosters because forfeiting appears less suspicious if the rounds were 5-10 minutes apiece. This would clog the site would low-quality debates and detract from a number of exceptional members have brought to the site via intellectual debate and discussion.
I have thoroughly rebutted Pro's case, and even if you don't buy my arguments, you still vote Con because he conceded on an exception to the resolution in the last round.
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...;
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...;
 - http://tinyurl.com...
" He is stating what "is," but the resolution requires him to argue what "ought" to be. This doesn't at all advance his position."
What i said implies that because it's customary to freestyle battles, we should also freestyle on DDO not that it's a rule though.
"could freestyle aimlessly, incoherently with nothing more than racial slurs. That doesn't demonstrate that I can rap about a diverse range of subjects"
Of course not because your rapping only about racial slurs - nothing more.
" This point can be extended to normal rap battles where an extra time commitment allows rappers the time to refine their arguments, allowing for creativity to thrive by virtue of the fact that time, effort and commitment come into play. "
A decent amount of my raps on DDO are freestyled. I'll demonstrate later that putting in just as much commitment in free-styling than refining your raps will get more or less the same results if not better results.
"He suggests that this view is universal, though this is hardly the case, as people learn differently and draw inspiration from different things, and some may need an external source of inspiration."
Do these people immediately write it down so they won't forget? If not then that idea may be lost and other potential ideas as well. At the given moment, you should always write down your ideas so that you may revisit them later. This is called free writing.
" There have been an assortment of rap battles conducted over DDO over a period of time from Mikal, Blade-of-Truth, and others  that were not "freestyles" that were quite well-done in both my and many other's opinions. "
I don't consider Mikal a battle rapper, i think his raps need a lot of substance. I'll quote a line:
"Don't get this twisted, the only reason I took this was because I was bored
My bars are a weapon, and I'm going to slay you with them like they were a sword
Run it through you were precision and on my own accord, then ripe our spinal cord.
Run you over like a stampeding hord, then drop you on the ground like you were a league of legends ward"
His last line is much longer than the 1st three and many of his bars are uneven. If he had the time to refine his raps then he clearly didn't do it.
Blade's raps are much more solid and neatly done.
"You start by calling me pretty, thanks for the compliment
My complex content of comments prop me up like a monument
The dominant, heat-seeking missile sent to destroy the incompetent
You"re like an acre of land trying to claim you"re a continent"
Now in his video rap battle, i disliked both Blade and Spaceking's videos because they clearly were not freestyling, but simply reading off of their lyrics. Since it's audio, flow will also be judged. The constant pauses and lack of emotion simply didn't build up momentum at all. When you do that, you look and sound like a robot. Blade's flow wasn't that bad, but it's underdeveloped. Would you rather have someone who does that or someone who simply stares at the camera and just raps a whole bunch of hard disses with a fluid flow and expresses various emotions with no rehearsal?
Here's a presentation of the best rap delivery made by ShadowKingStudios
Listen to how smooth his flow and transitions are, his rhythm is consistent with the beat itself. Imagine if he freestyled that on camera, i'm pretty sure his rap would be preferred over most rappers on DDO and i think even you would agree with me. Now lets look at one of my best rap battles and compare. This one was mostly freestyled on the spot and you can notice differences. I built up my momentum from dissing to being more aggressive and even more aggressive until finally i am on fire, totally giving the best in my last round (1).
I start with
"I'm callin out the unbelievers who blatantly diss religion
denyin' the fact that their views are also a personal decision
Claimin i'ma Christian raised that way, could be a satanist
Sayin' family tradition matters, i guess also applies to an atheist
N' to all agnostics dissin' a creationist as they persist n' persist
Woah wait a minute, i thought ya'll said your uncertain he exists?"
"You said God's imaginary, let me ask you stuff to make you look like an imbecile, leavin' your mind swirled
Voltaire said he'd destroy God's Word, how come his house is now the top Bible centers in the world?
Allow me to quote Scripture: "the serpent'll crush his heel, but he'll crush his head
If God deceased, how come we still break bread, widespread despite bloodshed?
After i kill you in this rap battle, you might as well confess n' convert on your deathbed
Difference between you n' haters tryin' to destroy God? Nothin! e'ery single one is dead!"
to a more direct personal diss
"Huts of deer skin? In the near East, clay houses were innovated!
Why did I do that? To show this fool is ignorant and uneducated!
Logic and reason? By who's logic could that be?
let me illustrate let take a trip down your history"
"let's resolve this philosophical confusion, skeptics believe absolute truth is an illusion!
You diss Christ n say he's a delusion, but after this you're getting a blood transfusion!"
I should have written it like "let's resolve this philosophical confusion, skeptics believe absolute truth is an illusion! You diss Christ n say he's a delusion, but after this you be beggin him for a blood transfusion!" In any case, it still produced the same results.
This is the most extreme round:
"I'm the released beast choppin' you to pieces with dual blades, you won't be able to rationalize my cruel ways!
This bloody massacre has been worse than the crusades, so i'ma free your soul by brutalizing your rib-cage!
My lyrical style in it's agility will send volatile winds across the vicinity as i send 10,000 blows to your face!
As i'm going so wild, so fast, like a wing chun master, i'ma shatter the backbone of your argument out of place!
Forget the punchlines!, i send deadly fists n' hits as your skull splits to my metaphorical damage til each hand breaks!"
"When i ask you "do you believe in a spiritual being called God?" You say "I don't know!"
When i ask you "do you believe in a physical being called Santa?" You respond "Hell no!"
So your inconsistent agnosticism with atheism are on death row! now watch them die slow!
You shouldn't have faced me, cuz of now your in my way of a rap war, i'm just brutalizing!
Your way past realizing that your just having a mental breakdown, your dehumanizing!"
"So i will reiterate this, i got holy power emantin' from me that'll destroy the reaper!
I might be a spiritual leader who trusts in God, but don't underestimate this preacher!
I deliver verses full of fatalities leave you beyond galaxies, so learn from your teacher!
From now, you'll be wakin' up every night as you respect n' fear my name: Truth_seeker!"
This is an example of momentum building up in each round. I don't focus on writing perfect lines or concentrating on my lyrics calmly, i was literally pacing back and forth in my house just feeling the burn, being very aggressive and letting it all out while their raps constantly stay the same.
I did not concede, i simply provided an exception which is very unlikely if the debate takes technically three days and even more so that you accepted knowing that you would have some time to respond.
Con brings up the possibility of cheaters, but i'm not arguing that rounds should be 5-10 minutes, simply that you should freestyle even if it's set to 72 hours.
Quality takes time, no argument there, but you should also implement what you already know beforehand. For example, when i faced Ajab on a scientific battle (2), i freestyled my lyrics while Ajab didn't and took the time to research his. Honestly, Ajab probably knows more about science than i do, but what happened? I dissed him using word puns, various other jokes, and scientific terms, had he responded sooner i would've dropped some more clever disses in my head that are now lost. He gave up and i got positive reviews.
On the contrary, encouraging freestyle would help newer rappers practice. I never said that they had to freestyle during a rap battle. Like any practice, "warm ups" are essential. Wikihow recommends that you freestyle on paper before battling (3).
"You could come up with three great bars, but if you see that the timer is running out and you only have 60 seconds to submit, you may be inclined to throw in filler words, and profanities tend to come to mind"
Since you implied earlier than quality takes time, do you think that you can create quality in 60 seconds? Probably not, thus you have no other option but to throw in filler words.
Con did not cite a statement by DDO proving that it stands for effort and putting effort into arguments. Even if he did, it would not apply to things such as rap battles as battles don't use arguments or sources.
Troll battles cannot be avoided as nothing is being done to prevent them from being made, thus it's not relevant to discourage rap battles. It's also faulty to assume that battles do not bring intellectual debate and discussion, i have a battle where i debate the problem of evil while rapping at the same time (4).
A study on freestyling shows this (5):
"The findings suggest that the flowing, freestyling brain can relax its neural constraints to allow freer oral expression of words and ideas."
Users should freestyle in rap battles to free their ideas.
Pro doesn't address my BOP analysis, so I'll extend it: he is making an affirmative statement that applies to all rap battles on DDO, and therefore must be able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Pro states that it's customary to freestyle rap battles; however, this is again an irrelevant statement because this is an "is" statement rather than an ought statement. Pro argues that because something is customary outside of DDO that it should be customary inside DDO, but this argument is fundamentally incoherent, and he doesn't establish a link from "is" to "ought."
Pro concedes the point I made regarding freestyling aimlessly, incoherently with nothing more than racial slurs. Note that I had made this point in my prior argument to rebut his point that "freestyling on the spot demonstrates you can creatively rap about a diversity of things." Pro doesn't address the rest of my rebuttal, so he concedes on this point.
Pro responds to my argument that time is crucial to allowing rappers to translate effort and commitment into refined, creative arguments by stating that he has freestyled many of his rap battles on DDO, and believes that he can demonstrate that the commitment and results are identical for freestyling. There are several problems with his argument. First, he has the burden of proof, and we have no way to verify that he has "freestyled most of his raps." In fact, from where we stand, with those battles having all been completed and no way to know where TS or how long he took in compiling his raps, how much time or effort or commitment he put into them, so this point cannot carry his burden of proof. Second, even if he COULD demonstrate "the same results" or "just as much commitment," this would be irrelevant because he is suggesting replacing non-freestyle rap battles with freestyle rap battles. He wants X instead of X + Y. This impossible-to-prove point cannot even carry his burden.
I argued last round that people draw their inspiration from different things and many learn differently. He only responds to my argument indirectly by saying that people should write down their ideas so they don't forget them. This does not address my point at all. Moreover, under a system of freestyling, you can't "free write" because you need to rap on the spot, so this point of his is completely moot. My argument hasn't even been addressed.
I pointed out last round that many rap battles from Mikal, BOT and others, which weren't freestyles, were quite well done in my judgment, and Pro only responds by saying that he "doesn't consider Mikal a battle rapper." This point is utterly irrelevant, though. He is entitled to his opinion about Mikal and his rapping abilities, but per the definition of battle rap -- "a type of rapping that includes a lot of braggadocio (bragging and boasting) content "combined with put-downs, insults, and disses against real or imaginary opponents"  -- Mikal has in fact engaged in battle rap, and is therefore a battle rapper.
Pro goes on to criticize Mikal's, BOT's, and spaceking's rapping abilities. Note not only that this is beyond the scope of the resolution and doesn't at all address my arguments, but Pro has dropped my point from last round that "effectiveness is subjective, as is assessment of the adequacy of momentum." He doesn't at all dispute that judging rap batltes is highly subjective. Even the language of mine which he quoted accounted for this, as I remarked that I and many others -- note the subjectivity and lack of categorcial affirmation -- found their raps to be effective. Pro is entitled to think what he will about their lyricism, momentum, and whatnot and to feel as though their material were better had they been freestyling, but he provides no objective basis for proving this assertion true. He goes on to provide lists and lists of lyrics. However, these are wildly outside the scope of the resolution, and all he is doing at this point is taking up space and flooding his sources with irrelevant links that do not nothing to establish this resolution. He doesn't even respond to the argument he quoted, which criticized the notion of judging raps categorcially.
Pro claims that he has no conceded the debate, but he has. The resolution stipulates that rappers should "freestyle on the spot." Some people, naturally, are busy, and he himself admits post facto that this is an exception. By accepting an exception to the resolution he has laid out, one of which was not agreed upon beforehand, he has conceded the debate by poking a hole in his own resolution. He claims that this situation may be unlikely because "the debate technically takes three days." This isn't so in the case of a freestyle rap where you likely have 10 to 15 minutes per round. Moreover, even if you DID have three-day rounds, people are busy for a variety of reasons, so Pro's statement accomplishes nothing more than twisting himself into a pretzel in order to backtrack on an earlier remark. He says that people may accept knowing they have time to respond; well, yes, I take it that no one would accept a rap battle if they didn't have time. But if 15-minute-per-round freestyles are the norm, people simply aren't going to participate, or they're going to try and forfeit -- note that increased forfeiting was another point Pro dropped.
Pro fails to adequately rebut my point on cheating. He simply says that debates could be set to 72-hour rounds and people should freestyle, anyway. This completely defeats the purpose of his proposal because there is absolutely no way to discern whether someone has actually freestyled. If you set 72-hour rounds, the entire purpose of Pro's proposal fails apart because there is absolutely no enforcement mechanism. He concedes not long after on quality -- that with more time inevitably follows the potential for better aggregate quality -- so it follows from this that someone could choose NOT to freestyle and devote more time to their rap than another, resulting in a completely unfair advantage. Even under his proposed system, which itself is absurd and shifting the goalposts, this isn't doable or desirable.
After conceding on quality, he asserts that you should only use what you know beforehand. He does NOT defend this statement, nor why this should be the case on a debating website that values research and learning. Why would he want to suppress learning, research, and effort on a site that aims to nurture them? He provides an anecdotal example of a past debate wth Ajab which is utterly irrelevant for a few reasons: (1) he can't prove that he freestyled (2) he can't prove that the rap would not have been better had both debaters researched and (3) he cannot prove that the rap was superior to what it would've been even had he freestyled. The point is utterly irrelevant because I'm not advocating the banning of freestlye raps; again, he wants a one-size-fits-all plan, whereas I want both to be viable options as people differ in terms of what they excel and are comfortable in.
He claims that encouraging freestyle would help newer rappers practice. He doesn't demonstrate how, then goes on to say they he "never said they had to freestyle during a rap battle." His resolution would REQUIRE that they freestyle, so unless he would like to, again, refute his own resolution, he must in fact take the position that even newer rappers must freestyle. He discusses warm-ups and suggests that people freestyle on paper before battling. This is all fine and good except you can't "practice on paper" if you're freestyling with five to ten minute rounds, so once again, Pro refutes his own points.
Pro then concedes again the there is a necessary trade-off between time and quality, and concedes that this may result in including filler words.
With respect to what DDO stands for, clearly Pro has not read the DDO homepage:
"Debate.org is a free online community where intelligent minds from around the world come to debate online and read the opinions of others. Research today’s most controversial debate topics and cast your vote on our opinion polls" .
The homepage emphasizes intelligent banter and research, both of which require time and effort. He tries to, with a broad brush, suggest that this doesn't apply to rap battles. There is no basis for this exception. Moreover, rap battles certainly can use sources, as both Mikal and Shadowking have done , and involve submitting -- and perhaps making, via flipping bars -- arguments in the same way as regular debates.
He claims that troll debates are going to happen regardless and thus wouldn't discourage rap battles. He doesn't connect this pint at all except by saying that there is nothing preventing them from being made, but this simply isn't the case. The site moderators work tirelessly to delete troll debates. Again, Pro drops my point regarding boosting and forfeiting. He goes on to strawman my argument by suggesting that I said that rap battles do not bring intelligent debate. I said nothing of the sort. I said a possible rise in troll rap battles to boost ELO, or battles that ended up being trolled due to lack of time, would be a drain on the site.
Pro provides a study saying that rap battling leads to "freer oral expression." So? The study also said that freestyling decreases activity in parts of the brain that "control and suppress," which suggests that people will be rasher and say dumber things they may regret later whilst rapping . This doesn't at all advance Pro's burden of proof, nor provide a reason as to why freestyling should be the only form of rapping on DDO.
I have refuted all of Pro's arguments, while he has dropped and conceded many of mine. I don't have enough characters to provide a thorough list of arguments he has dropped, unfortuntely. At this point, he has yet to fulfill his BOP and has even conceded the debate.
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...
Con only quoted half of what I said. I said "Freestyling on the spot demonstrates that you can creatively rap about a diversity of things within seconds and use it to defeat your opponent." What i mean is that freestyling allows for you to rap about many subjects vs. simply one (1). I'll quote Wiki:
"There are two types of freestyle. There’s an old-school freestyle that’s basically rhymes that you’ve just thought of on the spot that may not have anything to do with any subject or that goes all over the place. Then there’s freestyle where you come off the top of the head"
Anecdotal is used only in the context of empirical evidence, not in this debate where we speak strictly on music tastes. Inductively, you could conclude that i freestyled. but the point is not to prove that i freestyled, the point is to show why you should freestyle. Con says that people draw inspiration from different things, but never proves that people should not freestyle. Con's assertion that it cannot be known that i freestyled is just as baseless and irrelevant as saying that other DDO users took the time to create their lyrics. I was trying to prove that freestyled raps are "better" than raps conducted over a period of time.
Freestyling allows you to use your surroundings to create lyrics from. It also increases your ability to write lyrics faster.
Freestyling forces you to adjust your voice to the rhythm in your mind or to the beat, improving flow and creativity (2) if you are on cam.
If you simply want to stick to writing then i suppose freestyling could technically be considered a form of free-writing. Free-writing has several benefits such as opening up to new ideas, being more creative, get past writer's block, coming up with originality, forces you to open up to new topics, etc. (3).
One way to know if someone is not freestyling is if there's no lyrics is if they have lyrics already written down, thus making it predictable. If their eyes are constantly focused on the cam as if they're reading off of something then they're probably not freestyling. If they're in a dark room and you see them staring at their monitor light then they're probably reading off of lyrics. Finally, there should be a difference between freestyling and regular writing. The two should not be equally as good. If you compare alleged freestyles with their regular lyrics and find the two are equally as good then it's probably not a real freestyle. Freestyle rappers should also be able to point out things in their environment quickly (4).
Finally, Con could argue that it still wouldn't prove that rappers freestyled as they could memorize their lyrics on cam but how likely is it for them to be able to come up with creative lyrics for say 5 rounds, memorize them, and peform in a 5 minute battle? If someone does it beforehand, either way, they are still more likely to lose the battle as their raps are static. For example, in my "Atheist/agnostic rap battle" i made a rap rebuttal on my opponent's insult towards Christian living ("Huts of deer skin? In the near East, clay houses were innovated! Why did I do that? To show this fool is ignorant and uneducated!). If that were to happen then i could just diss them on how their garbage raps never improve, brag about how i can beat them with few words or time, how it's like i'm interacting with a brick wall, etc. The point is that with freestyling, there's more fluidity and creativity which can be expressed while if someone prepared it all before the battle, there probably isn't. There's also interactions in rap battles (I diss your face and you respond back to it). If the person doesn't do it, they probably aren't freestyling. Considering all these variables, it's highly unlikely for someone to rap and not get caught "cheating" when it comes to freestyling.
Con assumes that by doing 15 minute battles that they will forfeit but he presented no evidence. I never said that freestyle battles had to be 15 minutes, they can be set to 2 days to accommodate people's schedules, but at the moment of rapping, they should freestyle on the spot. I did not concede.
I refuted Con's statement that battles "would clog the site would low-quality debates and detract from a number of exceptional members have brought to the site via intellectual debate and discussion." Con's argument before was " you would likely need time to conduct research which significantly enhanced and provides a new dimension to the battle which would be virtually impossible if you were merely freestyling" but now he says that i can't prove that rap would be better if both debaters researched.
"He discusses warm-ups and suggests that people freestyle on paper before battling. This is all fine and good except you can't "practice on paper" if you're freestyling with five to ten minute rounds, so once again, Pro refutes his own points."
Con fails to quote the rest of what i said. I will repeat myself:
"On the contrary, encouraging freestyle would help newer rappers practice. I never said that they had to freestyle during a rap battle. Like any practice, "warm ups" are essential. Wikihow recommends that you freestyle on paper before battling."
Con also makes the assumption that newer members would be intimidated by freestyling, which members? Has he interviewed a newer rapper in order to verify his claims? Con did not cite any sources to back them up.
"Pro then concedes again the there is a necessary trade-off between time and quality, and concedes that this may result in including filler words"
It's only because you presented a biased scenario in which you have no choice but to use filler words. This is also under the assumption that the person freestyling will create a bad freestyle in the time available which has no basis, so I did not concede.
"The homepage emphasizes intelligent banter and research, both of which require time and effort."
Con ignores what i said about implementing what you already know based on research freestyling during a rap battle.
"The site moderators work tirelessly to delete troll debates. "
No they don't, Airmax (moderator) himself has participated in a rap battle with me long ago (5). This refutes the implication Con has that rap battles are troll debates which should be deleted.
"The study also said that freestyling decreases activity in parts of the brain that "control and suppress," which suggests that people will be rasher and say dumber things they may regret later whilst rapping "
Con doesn't quote the article which leads him to believe that "people will be rasher and say dumber things they may regret later whilst rapping" therefore he has no evidence that's what the study concludes.
I have presented evidence for why freestyling should be encouraged in the DDO community during rap battles.
Pro has attempted to shift the goalposts of the resolution in his last round in soite of not disputing any of my framework or burden analysis in earlier rounds. Note that the resolution requires him to take the position that all rap battles on DDO should be freestyled on the spot. This is his burden of proof, but he has attempted to change this, as shown in his conclusion, to "encouraging freestyles on DDO." This is not the resolution. As I pointed out last round and as he has, once again, dropped, he is arguing for X, whereas I am arguing for X + Y. He wants to replace all other forms of rap battles with freestyles, whereas my position is to leave them be and allow people to decide.
Regarding quoting, Pro is right that I didn't quote every bit of his argument. I don't have enough space. I have responded to every single argument he put forward and, unlike him, I haven't strawmanned or dropped any contentions he put forward.
He claims that I only quoted half of what he said. The bolded portion, "within seconds and use it to defeat your opponent," is utterly irrelevant. Freestyling is fast and one person is going to win, so I'm not disputing the bold statement because it's part and parcel of the definition of freestyling. I refuted the rest of the statement which contained his argument, which he has conceded on.
He says that freestyling allows you to rap about many subjects. This may be true, but so does regular battle rap. This doesn't at all differentiate it from battle rap, and I disputed his last statement because he attempted to claim that freestyling, ipso facto, demonstrates creativity and diversity, and I provided an example -- and later on my argument about "filler" words, which he also conceded -- as to how this wasn't the case.
He quotes from Wikia showing there are two types of freestyle. This point is irrelevant, because both are "on the spot," per se, but the first one appears random, aimless, and sporadic. This doesn't advance his BOP.
He has absolutely no idea what ancedotal evidence is: "non-scientific observations or studies, which do not provide proof but may assist research efforts" . Note that I said this with respect to his contention that he freestyles most of his rap battles on DDO because he cannot prove this to be the case. He says that the point isn't to prove that he freestyled -- note he doesn't have any idea what inductive reasoning is -- but to demonstrate why we should, but HIS point was that he has done it and believes that he has been successful, so he basically concedes that he can't prove this point via an anecdote. He claims that my assertion is as baseless as saying that DDO users took the time to create their own lyrics, but this cannot be the case: people either freestyle or create their own raps, and it follows that, because rounds tend to be several days long, people devote time to the rhymes. However, the BOP is on TS, not me, so HE must be able to demonstrate that people freestyle.
He concedes my point that people draw inspiration from people things and then says that I haven't proven why people shouldn't freestyle. He is shifting the goalposts: that is NOT my burden. Again, I am arguing for X + Y and not X. If someone doesn't feeel comfortable freestyling, perhaps because they're new to the site, they should not be made to freestyle.
He claims he was trying to prove that freestyled raps are "better," but he cannot do this if he (1) cannot prove which raps were freestyled and (2) continues to drop my point that effectiveness is subjective. I win this debate on this second point alone.
He claims freestyling allows you to use your surroundings and increases your ability to write lyrics faster. He only asserts this, and it may be true, but he doesn't demonstrate how this differentiates freestyling from battle rap.
He claims that it improves flow and creativity, but does nothing more than cite an anonymous blog post. This is nothing more than assertion, and even if it were true, he does not differentiate it from ordinary battle rap.
He goes on to discuss free writing, but drops my last rebuttal that free writing is impossible with five-minute rounds. Moreover, you can actually free write with extended rap battles, but so this point flips to my side.
He then cites a loosely related article to explain how we can tell the difference between freestyling and non-freestyling, the first of which involves a cam (note that most DDO rap battles are not conducted by cam). This contention is completely non-topical. He then asserts that freestyles are "better," but this point is moot with Pro having dropped my point on subjectivity twice now. His point on "pointing things out in the environment" quickly is not sourced to a scientific study or any valid evidence, so we can discard the point entirely. It also doesn't differentiate freestyle from non-freestyle rap.
He then goes on with another non-topical rant, and says that "with freestyling, there's more fluidity and creativity." This is only an assertion that he hasn't proved at all. He has not demonstrated to us that this is a categorical distinction between freestyle and non-freestyle battle rap, and by conceding on quality in the last round, this point actually flows to my side because, especially with newer members, this would be an extrordinarily hard task. His point about interactions in rap battles is meaningless, because people respond to each other both in freestyle and non-freestyle battle rap. Flipping bars is standard protocol, and in no way differentiates one from the other.
He then strawmans my argument AGAIN. I never assumed that people would forfeit. I said that this would likely increased the rate at which people forfeit with such short rounds. Note, also, that he attempts to shift the burden of proof, which is and always has been on Pro. His point about two-day rounds is irrelevant, also, because he dropped my rebuttal from last round that this would completely destroy the entire purpose of the process he is attempting to set up. He, again, dropped my critique of his concession on "business," with which he conceded the debate earlier on.
He has not refuted my argument that this would clog the site with low-quality debates. He strawmanned my argument by suggesting that I said rap battles are ipso facto low quality, but in reality I noted that short-round, ad-hoc rap battles would encourage newer members and boosters to use this to their advantage. This point was AGAIN dropped.
He again strawmans my argument. When did I say that he can't prove rap would be better with research? I stated that freestyle rap doesn't ALLOW you to research, and Pro said that you should simply go off of what you know, and pointed to his debate with Ajab as an example.
He then goes on to misread my argument. I didn't quote his entire argument, but responded to it at all. I already addressed "freestyling" on paper and how this would be utterly impossible with such short rounds and may intimidate newer members. He claims that I haven't "cited any sources." For the last time, the burden of proof is on Pro, not on me. I presented this as a possibility, and he hasn't rebutted my claim. Moreover, I have never rapped before, and I know I would be too intimidated to freestyle (note this goes beyond what is needed for this point to stick). If he is so content in his arguments with respect to newer members and practice, why doesn't he give them the OPTION to freestyle their raps and see which style they like best? Again, he wants X, whereas I want X + Y. He wants to limit choices, whereas I want to expand them and let newer members to decide.
He claims that I presented a "biased" scenario. No, I presented a plausible scenario of what could actually take place, and you conceded that quality takes time. It is not an assumption that the person created a "bad freestyle," but rather the point was rendered under the possibility that someone did, be it because of nerves, inexperience, tongue-tie, etc.
He falsely claims that I ignored what he said aobut "implementing what you already know." No, you can do that as well. My only point was that DDO values research and learning, and I cited a quote, which he fails to respond to.
He then strawmans me ONCE AGAIN by claiming that I stated rap battles are troll debates. This isn't what I said, and anyone can re-read my past argument to see that. Airmax is a fine rapper, but his debate wth TS was not a troll debate, though TS did forfeit three rounds in a row .
Pro fails to read my last argument. I did quote from the study: I noted that freestyling decreases activity in parts of the brain "control and supress" and, as Pro himself said, increases activity in areas that lead to "freer oral expression." This does in fact prove my point that this could possibly lead to rash behavior, and Pro fails to respond to this argument at all.
Dropped and Conceded Arguments
-Pro has the burden of proof
-Busyness may preclude short rap battles (conceded)
-People have different preferences, perhaps due to personal factors (e.g., ADHD)
-Effectiveness is subjective
-Trade-off between time and quality (conceded)
-Free-writing is impossible in 5 minutes
-Longer rounds defeat the purpose of freestyle
-X versus X + Y -- it is possible to have both freestyle and non-freestyle raps under my system
-Freestyling does not necessarily lead to greater creativity or diversity
-The fault in his own study
-He cannot prove which raps were freestyled and which weren't, so any attempts at analysis of past raps is moot
-Increased likelihood of forfeiting/boosting/troll debates
-Disregards what DDO stands for regarding research, effort and commitment
-Encourages filler (conceded)
Pro has dropped and conceded far too many points and failed to carry his own burden of proof. As a result, it follows that you should vote Con.
Thank you to TS and our audience.
 - http://tinyurl.com...
 - http://tinyurl.com...
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Since this is a clear change from the status quo, it is evident that Pro has full BOP. With that said, I am awarding this to Con because I do not feel Pro was able to maintain that burden throughout. This is evident with several dropped or conceeded points by Pro, which alone is enough for him to lose. I do agree with Pro that freestyling showcases skill more accurately than written rhymes, that is about as good as Pro's arguments got, but was notstrong enough to carry his burden. He showed that, skill-wise, it would be beneficial. Con was able to show though that it would cause more harm than good through several ways including time restrictions, potential for limiting the active rappers, and not having a means to verify that these are actual freestyles. With all of this in consideration, it's only right to award Con the win due to Pro failing to defeat the challenges presented to him.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I felt like pro's arguments concerning Mikal were too texas-sharpshooter, and that many of con's contentions, especially the educational value and quality of the rap, were dropped.
Vote Placed by YamaVonKarma 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-||-|
Reasons for voting decision: If we look at the battle from a non subjugated point of view, it is ever so clear that the smart vote lie here... with tied. For in a debate regarding the will of the masses, can anyone ever claim they've truly won?
Vote Placed by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: CON introduces several contentions that are entirely conceded, such as the value of rap debates being educational or otherwise meaningful as opposed to simply being racial slurs. PRO severely weakens his case by allowing an exception for preoccupied users. I don't see the section regarding Mikal's rap to be particularly relevant. Furthermore, as PRO has the full BoP, using subjective analysis comparing him to Mikal does not help prove the resolution. PRO also seems to get hung up on arguing what 'is' when his resolution deals with what 'ought.' Since MO didn't have the BoP, he didn't need arguments. However, many of his were dropped (aside from the aforementioned conceded ones), and these only serve to strengthen his position. Lastly, PRO tries to shift the BoP onto CON when it is PRO's BOP. My vote goes to CON.
Vote Placed by SeventhProfessor 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Con did a good job of presenting his arguments, but Pro had better conduct, s/g, and sources. "rap battles on DDO should be freestyled on the spot." That "." should have been after the end quotes. Grammar to Pro. Con actively attacked and took part in a flame war just because someone didn't vote for him. Conduct to Pro. Con used rap battles as several sources. Sources to Pro. Pro had better sources, conduct, and s/g, totaling 4 points. Con had better args, and only got three points. TS wins.
Vote Placed by Daltonian 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I would like to express the rights given to me under the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution and make a political statement by voting for neither candidate.
Vote Placed by Domr 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro fulfilled BoP. Many of Con's rebuttals were off topic, and didn't require a response. Con disregarded the definition of Battle Rap/ Rap Battle given in the opening argument. Con tried to state fallacies Pro did Not commit. Con finalized by calling Pro's argument rants (disrespectful). Con used biased rebuttals, failing to refute the resolution.
Vote Placed by Jellon 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro builds an argument around what is customarily done outside of DDO, but Con gives solid reasons why DDO is a fundamentally different medium. Con gives us many reasons to believe that freestyle raps on the spot would lower the quality of some portion of the rap battles on DDO. Pro attempts to recover by showing that not all rap battles would suffer, but Con's claim doesn't rely on universality. In the end, I believe Pro lost, because the original resolution in the subject line is highly subjective. Pro's arguments are also subjective, and it's typically very hard to prove an opinion is superior to competing opinions. The resolution should have been modified to be more objectively testable.
Vote Placed by JasperFrancisShickadance 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was more consistent in arguments than Con. Arguments like "Freestyling in rap battles shows lyrical proficiency because you are able to instantly come up with disses just by looking at your opponent's picture, observing any and everything around you, dissing their name and reputation, and so on" were not successfully refuted by Con. MO even said "as long as I am able to rebut Pro's case, you vote negative." I don't agree altogether with that (because I believe he should put more effort into arguments; rebuttals are easier), but I will go with what he said. I think Pro won overall because Con didn't refute his arguments better. Love how Pro said "Of course not because your rapping only about racial slurs - nothing more" in response to Con saying "freestyle is aimless..." Good job pro.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Con won. That's it- Pro was done. Pro had an okay beginning, then what the hell was up with it coming to the ending? Con failed to meet the burden of proof- so his chances of winning went goodbye- poof. He dropped some vital main contentions- and completely forgot to rebutt, allowing Con to kick his- ahem. *looks left and right for Max.* Pro didn't touch some points, and it was seen quite clearly. S'a clear win for the Offset that's Monetary. [How's that for an RFD?!]
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.