The Instigator
lord_megatron
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
Julian-Harker
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should forfeit count as an automatic victory for the other side?

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 2 votes the winner is...
lord_megatron
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/7/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 304 times Debate No: 92458
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

lord_megatron

Pro

Because once the other side forfeits, your rebuttals remain unanswered and therefore the argument is in your favor.
Julian-Harker

Con

Not always, you sometimes don't have any time so you end up automatically forfeiting without the opponent knowing why. It could be because you're busy, out somewhere or other debates to do. I reckon they should remove the forfeit timer and add an option of choosing to forfeit, like surrendering.
Debate Round No. 1
lord_megatron

Pro

That is called concession, when you give up on the debate. Forfeit timers are necessary as otherwise I would have to wait for years for the next argument. While sometimes debaters are busy, it simply goes against conduct and you shouldn't have accepted the debate in the first place. After forfeiting, it is very hard to pick up the flow of the debate again, and it is wasted time for the other debater. Forfeit is a big problem in 1-3 round debates, where every round is crucial.
Julian-Harker

Con

As people accept them, they are enlightened to begin on the debate and it's not like they'd instantly know they'd have to forfeit. At least make it when they return to the debate and their forfeit timer has expired, let them give an overview why they were inactive and give them a chance to continue. If they lie, you'll be able to report them of this.
Debate Round No. 2
lord_megatron

Pro

Now suppose I forfeit this round, and then say I went on some random trip, how can you verify that? Furthermore, suppose if I forfeited round 1 and 2 and struck a crushing argument in round 3, should I still win the debate? It really goes hard on the instigator when this happens. It is hard to detect lies in real life, much harder on internet. Overall, forfeiting is violation of conduct and is a tactic used by some debaters to strengthen their arguments, therefore forfeiting should count as an automatic loss. Vote for Pro.
Julian-Harker

Con

Forfeiting should not count a part in the victory, as long as that individual composes his part to the round, it's fine. If you forfeited this round, put a time out in the debate until the individual comes back. If after a period of time that person doesn't return, you can confirm it as 'giving up' and it will automatically be switched to a loss.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: David_Debates// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument of "innocent until proven guilty" was a little shoddy, but I found it to be convincing enough to rebut the burden of proof that Pro has. No major spelling, grammar, or conduct irregularities.

[*Reason for removal*] While the voter points out the argument that they found most convincing, this does not meet the standards. The voter has to assess arguments made by both debaters. If burden of proof plays a role in the decision, it should be clear on whom that burden lies, why they have it, what that burden is, and why they failed to meet it.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Lyksina// Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: PRO was more convincing.

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD. The voter just restates one point allocation and doesn't explain the other.
********************************************************** **************
Posted by lord_megatron 11 months ago
lord_megatron
"Put a time on the debate" But that's what the round time is for. Plus, it goes unfair for someone who wants a quick debate
Posted by Julian-Harker 11 months ago
Julian-Harker
Good debate! We went through that fast!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Udel 11 months ago
Udel
lord_megatronJulian-HarkerTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro explains that if your opponent forfeits your arguments go undisputed so you should win. Con says sometimes people forfeit because they are busy but it does not necessarily prove that the other person is right. Pro explains that a forfeit is the same as a concession for the sake of debate. Con just says "not it's fine" but Pro explained that forfeiting is violation of conduct, and is a tactic used by some debaters to strengthen their arguments, therefore forfeiting should count as an automatic loss. Con dropped this argument. Pro wins arguments.
Vote Placed by 42lifeuniverseverything 11 months ago
42lifeuniverseverything
lord_megatronJulian-HarkerTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct, spelling, and sources were tied. Arguments go to Pro for one reason. 1) Con contradicted himself on where he stood on the resolution. Pro had to prove forfeit should count as automatic victory for the suffering party. He did so through his arguments on necessity of timers, difficulty of reigniting the debate, it being a problem for small debates, and lies being easy to do. BOP is upheld. But Con contradicted by saying that no time limit should be on a forfeit. Then in the last round stating that debates should have an ultimate time limit on total forfeiture. This contradiction defeats the logic Con used to justify his side, because all Con's arguments were based upon busy lives and time limits. I VOTE PRO.