The Instigator
Cantseeinthedark
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
tehrandomdebater
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should joking non-serious debates be allowed?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Cantseeinthedark
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/1/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 580 times Debate No: 39799
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Cantseeinthedark

Pro

I had posted a non-serious debate in which I had challenged someone I knew personally as a joke. We both however planed to take it semi-seriously to see if we could have a logical and reasonable debate about an absurd topic. I can understand that it may have been offensive to some but plenty of other debates offend others. Yet mine was removed.
I can also see that his site is intended for serious intellectual debates and for the most part that is what this site is used for, but if someone wants to have a laugh or two then why shouldn't they be allowed to? If no one wants this type of behavior they can simply not accept any joking or trolling debate challenges. The majority of debates will remain serious anyway.
tehrandomdebater

Con

First of all, there are a ton of non-serious people, and it will always be this way. People are naturally like this. Debating sites are not official, and since people are not actually physically there, they fell like they are anonymous, and can freely troll the debates. I am not exactly what you would call a very serious debater, and mostly other people and I usually express our own opinions. As you can, see, I have clearly taken the upper hand in this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Cantseeinthedark

Pro

Cantseeinthedark forfeited this round.
tehrandomdebater

Con

tehrandomdebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Cantseeinthedark

Pro

Ill just restate what i have stated in the comments section of this debate.
No i truly do not see how you have the upper hand. As you didn't truly debate against me saying that joking non-serious debates should be allowed. You seemed like you were going to make a point when you stated that the majority of people are non-serious debaters but you didn't really express that as a reason for not allowing joking debates. You simply just stated it as a fact.
tehrandomdebater

Con

tehrandomdebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Cantseeinthedark 3 years ago
Cantseeinthedark
Probably should have made the time window in which i could reply longer...and to my opponent No i truly do not see how you have the upper hand. As you didn't truly debate against me saying that joking non-serious debates should be allowed. You seemed like you were going to make a point when you stated that the majority of people are non-serious debaters but you didn't really express that as a reason for not allowing joking debates. You simply just stated it as a fact.
Posted by sakskidz 3 years ago
sakskidz
i totally agree, thank you
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
CantseeinthedarktehrandomdebaterTied
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: I understand this resolution to be "Joking/nonserious debates should be allowed." CON affirmed this resolution ("Debating sites are not official...people...can freely troll the debates"), so arguments PRO. I would score conduct against both sides if I could.