The Instigator
InVinoVeritas
Pro (for)
Winning
95 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Losing
22 Points

RationalMadman should be banned from Debate.org

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 22 votes the winner is...
InVinoVeritas
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/20/2012 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,110 times Debate No: 28467
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (20)
Votes (22)

 

InVinoVeritas

Pro

Resolution: The DDO user RationalMadman should be banned from Debate.org

The first round is for acceptance.
Debate Round No. 1
InVinoVeritas

Pro

I. RationalMadman is obscene and offensive. For example, see: "your definition is no more valid than mine you bloody smartarse idiot." [1]

II. RationalMadman sometimes copies and pastes rather than coming up with original cases. See arguments here: [2]

III. RationalMadman starts a debate or accepts a challenge and then intentionally stops putting in effort, thereby wasting the effort of his opponent, when the opponent takes the time to type out a full argument. [3] [4] [5] (There are myriad other examples of this. This clearly is a misuse of the services provided by this website and is a sign of utter disrespect for other members. He chooses to approach serious, lengthy arguments that members work hard on with brief, facetious responses.

---

In conclusion, RationalMadman should be banned from Debate.org. This motion is upheld by the following issues:

I. his being obscene and offensive to other users,

II. prior instances of refusing to produce original arguments (and choosing to copy and paste sources instead),

III. and a facetiousness and immaturity approach that ultimately leads to a misuse of the website's service and the damaging of the quality of the DDO community, affecting all of the active members therein.

---

[1] http://www.debate.org...
[2] http://www.debate.org...
[3] http://www.debate.org...
[4] http://www.debate.org... (See last round)
[5] http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 2
InVinoVeritas

Pro

I extend my arguments.
RationalMadman

Con

I should not be banned because if I should be banned Juggle and Airmax (the current president of DDO) would have banned me. This entire debate is a direct insult and misjudgement of the true capabilities of Juggle's security system.

Juggle is the equivalent of what the Gods were to the Greeks and are to the Hindus, InVinoVeritas is using very foul insults to their intelligence and thus should himself be banned from DDO for making this debate and most certainly should this entire debate be banned as well. That is all.

Debate Round No. 3
InVinoVeritas

Pro

Every person who was banned from Debate.org was, for some time after committing his/her punishable actions, not banned. In the same way, every serial killer was, for some time after his/her murders, not detained by police/convicted of the crimes attributed to him/her.

"How can you arrest me?" says a bank robber. "I had not been arrested within two minutes after I robbed the bank; therefore, by arresting me now, you are implying that the legal system had failed for those two minutes." This is not a good defense for a bank robber. Why? Because REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT IT IS JUSTIFIABLE TO BLAME THE LEGAL SYSTEM FOR THOSE TWO MINUTES OF NON-INTERVENTION, the bank robber is still guilty of the crime committed and should be tried by the word of the law.

---

Con's response is clearly fallacious. Furthermore, the arguments that I made have yet to be challenged. If the opponent chooses to defend against them in the final round only, then this is unfair, since I would not have had a chance to rebut.

---

RationalMadman ought to be banned from Debate.org, because of:

I. his being obscene and offensive to other users,

II. prior instances of refusing to produce original arguments (and choosing to copy and paste sources instead),

III. and a facetiousness and immaturity approach that ultimately leads to a misuse of the website's service and the damaging of the quality of the DDO community, affecting all of the active members therein. (RationalMadman prefers to approach debates in the aforementioned manner " or tends to be incapable of doing otherwise, and this is evidenced by his prior video responses, using songs that are meant to depict offensive personal attacks.)
RationalMadman

Con

RationalMadman ought to be banned if Juggle ban him. xoxo

;
Debate Round No. 4
20 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 4 years ago
InVinoVeritas
Good riddance.
Posted by tennis47 4 years ago
tennis47
Well, guess what? You got your wish.
Posted by andrewkletzien 4 years ago
andrewkletzien
@Rational: I was bullied as well, buddy. Doesn't mean you have a reason to be obnoxious to others and constantly waste their time. Arrogance, defined.
Posted by rross 4 years ago
rross
I hope so
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
rross wrote:
: wiploc wrote:
: :He abuses people on this web site regularly. He should be banned, and it is not inappropriate to say
: : so.
: : Please reconsider your conduct vote.
:
: He's been abusive here in the comments, it's true. And it is really annoying the way he messes up
: debates all the time. But I still think it's mean to gang up on him like this.

I don't know why he accepted this debate. But he did, and, by so doing, he invited us to give him feedback on this topic.

Maybe did didn't know he was giving offense, and will quit trolling debates.
Posted by rross 4 years ago
rross
RationalMadman wrote:
:I'm a bully?! Haha... Tell that to all the cunts who bullied me as a kid.

"Cunts" bullied you, did they Rats? Dear me. No wonder you have such issues with women. :)
Posted by rross 4 years ago
rross
It should just be that you can block specific people from accepting your debates.
Posted by rross 4 years ago
rross
wiploc wrote:
:He abuses people on this web site regularly. He should be banned, and it is not inappropriate to say so.
:Please reconsider your conduct vote.

He's been abusive here in the comments, it's true. And it is really annoying the way he messes up debates all the time. But I still think it's mean to gang up on him like this.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 4 years ago
InVinoVeritas
You were bullied, and now is your chance to lash back... on a debate website. Good for you, RM.
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
I'm a bully?! Haha... Tell that to all the cunts who bullied me as a kid.
22 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Do I even need to post a reason.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: counter V.B. Tennis / John. If I didn't need to counter I would have given just MCA & conduct to pro.
Vote Placed by lannan13 4 years ago
lannan13
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Basicly a ff
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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: Everybody has a right to be heard or express themselves, I am sure there is a place for rationalmadman on this site, You can choose whom you decide to debate, I don't recall The Rationalmadman ever tampering with votes either, Leave him be.
Vote Placed by tennis47 4 years ago
tennis47
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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: I agree with RationalMadman. This whole debate was a direct insult to RationalMadman. If you don't like him, then ignore or block him!
Vote Placed by iamnotwhoiam 4 years ago
iamnotwhoiam
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did not contest Pro's arguments except to claim that if he should have been banned he would have been banned already. Pro pointed out the fallaciousness of this contention. Conduct to Pro for not just posting youtube videos.
Vote Placed by andrewkletzien 4 years ago
andrewkletzien
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Couldn't agree more.
Vote Placed by utahjoker 4 years ago
utahjoker
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: good bye rationalmadman
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 4 years ago
BlackVoid
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made no arguments in R2. He made one in R3, but drops the rebuttal to it in R4. Therefore, he has no arguments in his favor. On the other side...all of Pro's arguments are unanswered. Debate goes Pro right there. Conduct: Con trolled the debate and incidentally proved Pro's third argument to be correct (lol). Not the hardest debate I've ever had to judge.
Vote Placed by LaL36 4 years ago
LaL36
InVinoVeritasRationalMadmanTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con posted YouTube videos that were irrelevant. Grammar bad in those YouTube videos. Pro actually argued and debate sources are better than irrelevant youtube videos. As much as I want rational madman banned he shouldn't. Come on rational madman, stop being annoying in all debates.