The Instigator
WolfSong
Pro (for)
Winning
46 Points
The Contender
Cherymenthol
Con (against)
Losing
38 Points

Should kids be allowed to publish books?

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/14/2010 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,442 times Debate No: 10847
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (55)
Votes (15)

 

WolfSong

Pro

People I have asked have agreed that kids should be allowed t publish books or stories of their own because children have great imaginations. Kids I know love writing stories because they are in complete control of what happens. I, personally, love making up stories and often show them to my friends. It's also a great advantage because kids who love writing want to make their stories better, meaning better grammar. This way, friends can share their knowledge about grammar and pass through Junior High and High School with less to stress about.
Cherymenthol

Con

I thank my opponent for publishing what will soon, I hope, be a wonderful debate.

Please note that allowing my opponent to add terms in this debate later on will set up an unfair burden, therefor due to the fact that he has not supplied adequate definitions we must default to mine, which are as follows:

Kids: a young goats.

(http://dictionary.reference.com...)

Publish:to have one's work published

(http://dictionary.reference.com...)

OBSERVATION

The burden of proof lies with the PRO this round meaning they must prove kids ought to be allowed to publish books. This meaning the PRO must prove kids are able to write books, before they can be published. Therefor the burden of the CON is to prove either that Kids should not be allowed to write books or can't write books.

CONTENTION 1)

Goats are unable to write and thus publish books.

First if we look at a picture of a baby goat:

http://www.cuterush.com...

We can see that it doesn't have hands, or any other appendage that would allow for adequate writing. Therefor already we can see that CON should be winning.

if I am presented with a shred of credible evidence citing how yes Goats can write, I will concede.

PRO's Case

"People I have asked have agreed that kids should be allowed t publish books or stories of their own because children have great imaginations."

First of all this sentence demonstrates poor grammar, therefor we should vote for CON for those points, but furthermore My opponent makes no correlation between children and goats, or to provide adequate explanation of why having a good imagination, if goats even have that, is good for writing books. All this sentence does is demonstrates that CHILDREN have imaginations, thus children should become think tanks for authors and movie makers to get ideas.

"Kids I know love writing stories because they are in complete control of what happens."

In order for me to even refute this claim I must see some warrants, because with out warranting his arguments he has less sources (another CON vote) and does not fulfill his burden of proof

"I, personally, love making up stories and often show them to my friends."

My opponent is not a baby goat, she listed her age as 19 and a female in the U.S., and the definition of baby is:an infant or very young child (http://dictionary.reference.com...) , therefore even if she were to claim she was a goat, she wouldn't be a young baby goat.

"It's also a great advantage because kids who love writing want to make their stories better, meaning better grammar."

It is unfair to allow my opponent to fiat this, Kids don't love to write they can't, also the editor in and publication edits the grammar so this argument falls.

"This way, friends can share their knowledge about grammar and pass through Junior High and High School with less to stress about."

No correlation between imagination in knowledge, it actually can be safely assumed their opposites, and I have shown how grammar is corrected by the editor not the kid, therefor all impacts to vote PRO, all arguments PRO, and CON's arguments show clearly how goats can' write and therefore ought not be allowed to publish books.

Thank you Vote CON and I look forward to my opponents responses.
Debate Round No. 1
WolfSong

Pro

Yes, I am a "goat," but I wasn't sure about the age limit, and I was looking for a challenge. I am truly a thirteen-year-old eighth grader that wishes to compete. Now that we have cleared that subject, may I move on?

You said "The burden of proof lies with the PRO this round meaning they must prove kids ought to be allowed to publish books." And I agree. Why not open up classes that teach the children (or 'goats' as you put it) how to put their imaginations to work?

A friend told me this morning, "Writing makes me forget my problems and sucks me into a world I created. It's the most wonderful thing a person could do." Even though kids CAN publish books, I think the publishers could at least see the creativity and adventure children made. If you are a parent, aren't you proud of your child's work? I know this sounds like an opportunity to argue against me, but I write stories that makes my friends bother me to finish because they love them so much. If I, a thirteen-year-old, can entertain hard-to-capture-attention-type of kids, isn't that good enough to publish?

"It is unfair to allow my opponent to fiat this, Kids don't love to write they can't, also the editor in and publication edits the grammar so this argument falls." Indeed that is true, kids do NOT like writing. I'm one of those kids, in fact. But a simple solution was found- typing. Not only does it help me catch spelling mistakes, but I do learn how to use grammar better. Nothing annoys me more than that red or green line under words. Another great thing about typing a story is the new typing skills a person receives. But again, you have said the editor edits the grammar. I say a kids should have at least five adults look over the story before sending it to the publisher.

Lastly, I admit the goat definition was clever. But I'm sure you knew what I meant.

Thanks for taking up this debate. I think it will help my skills. :)
-WolfSong
Cherymenthol

Con

All my arguments were dropped so extend them. Therefore we can conclude that kids should not be allowed to publish books. So already the CON has won this debate. The reason why we ought to look to the CON's interpretation of the round is that fact that the "resolution" is set around a faulty premise. My opponent concedes children may publish written works, which means there is absolutely no negative ground. But to humor my opponent I will argue "children" ought not to be able to publish works on the condition that he concede the debate. This is due to the fact that he puts no effort into actually arguing what he spelled out.

Rebuttal

"Yes, I am a "goat," but I wasn't sure about the age limit, and I was looking for a challenge. I am truly a thirteen-year-old eighth grader that wishes to compete. Now that we have cleared that subject, may I move on?"

Their is not a shred of evidence to support this claim. Furthermore even if you are 13 years of age you do not qualify as a child. Therefore this argument does not matter so my opponent still ought concede.

"You said "The burden of proof lies with the PRO this round meaning they must prove kids ought to be allowed to publish books." And I agree. Why not open up classes that teach the children (or 'goats' as you put it) how to put their imaginations to work?"

Prove, in this context, means to supply evidence supporting your side, which you have yet to fulfill. You are advocating the implementation of classes for students to put their imaginations to work. And last I checked we already had these in the status quo, their called, "Creative Writing". And second of all You have failed to prove how goats have an imagination for that matter so that blip of an argument holds no ground.

A friend told me this morning, "Writing makes me forget my problems and sucks me into a world I created. It's the most wonderful thing a person could do." Even though kids CAN publish books, I think the publishers could at least see the creativity and adventure children made... I write stories that makes my friends bother me to finish because they love them so much. If I, a thirteen-year-old, can entertain hard-to-capture-attention-type of kids, isn't that good enough to publish?

We have adults who do this even better, allowing fro better concepts look at authors such as James Patterson, Stephanie Meyers, J.K. Rowling, they all have captured these supposed "Hard to capture attention type of kids". Also whats to say authors don't get ideas from children, James Patterson for instance was my neighbor for several years. During this time he gave me pre-released copies of the Maximum Ride series and permitted me to give critiques on it. This negates the concept that we need children to get children's ideas. Furthermore your life once again does not represent a kid's perspective because of age and species. And finally you have to explain why this is good enough to publish, remember burden of proof? so until then no its not.

"Indeed that is true, kids do NOT like writing. I'm one of those kids, in fact. But a simple solution was found- typing. Not only does it help me catch spelling mistakes, but I do learn how to use grammar better. Nothing annoys me more than that red or green line under words. Another great thing about typing a story is the new typing skills a person receives."

Why do you insist you represent the entire child populace, not to be rude but you simply do not. I find those lines under the words (Which actually include Blue in the new Windows Office) cheery and colorful. But this is assuming the kids in question have a computer to type on, which is not always the case. Also this doesn't adequately affirm once again the burden of proof is not met, and the impacts of learning to type are non-unique we have classes to do this in school. But the negative impacts are unique to the PRO's world, if they insist on replacing writing with typing we lose valuable writing skills, while in the CON's world we get the positive impacts of both and none of the negative. This clearly demonstrates a negative of the plan my opponent insists on using meaning we ought to vote CON to get rid of these.

"I say a kids should have at least five adults look over the story before sending it to the publisher."

Okay once again you are arguing the implementation of a policy. What if the child doesn't know five adults who will look over it, then they can't submit it to the publisher. Also what if the adults are not competent enough to detect all errors? Because even authors, adult authors, have their novel read by editors, furthermore my opponent does not understand the full concept of an editor, they do more than just spell and grammar check, they revise parts of a book.

"Lastly, I admit the goat definition was clever. But I'm sure you knew what I meant."

No I didn't and for that reason you must concede, it is your fault for not clarifying yourself and we default to the CON's definitions because yet agin you didn't provide any

"Thanks for taking up this debate. I think it will help my skills."

This isn't really a debate mind you. You failed to argue my points, set up a faulty premise, and have never once provided a shred of empiric or analytic evidence.

Thank you and I eagerly await my opponents response. :D
Debate Round No. 2
WolfSong

Pro

First of all, just to let you and our debate readers know, I am doing this debate between school, homework, and basketball games. I have very little time to find my evidence. Besides, This is one of the very few times I can debate without much of a reason other than coming up with a great idea to debate about. This first paragraph is NOT actually part of this debate.

"And last I checked we already had these in the status quo, their called, "Creative Writing." Creative Writing IS a class, I agree with you there. BUT I'm asking for a whole class period, meaning (in Middle School's case) I'm asking to take one class, ONE CLASS period to let imaginations run wild. By running wild, I mean children are using their imaginations. Think of cartoonists. They have to use their imaginations from a child's point of view.

"We have adults who do this even better, allowing fro better concepts look at authors such as James Patterson, Stephanie Meyers, J.K. Rowling, they all have captured these supposed "Hard to capture attention type of kids". Not completely true. Most Christian parents do not allow their children to read books like "Harry Potter" because it involves magic. "Twilight" is a book book along with it's series, but many people I know don't care much for the books. Ask any Middle Schooler at the school I attend. Most will say they don't like to read anyway unless the book is really interesting.
I have not picked up any of James Patterson's books probably because they do not interest me or anybody else I know. Another point I want to debate about is that children know what other children like in books more than adults. Most adults could never guess that quiet, kind student that gets straight A's likes books with dramatic deaths.

And now about those lines that appear under mistakes. I'm sure you'd be surprised how many students end up yelling at the computer because they get so annoyed by the lines. What they do (Yes, I bring this up a lot. But I want my point to go through!) is learn how to avoid those lines, making them earn how to spell and use grammar a lot better. I bring two people into this debate for examples. One is a complete computer geek. He is on the computer for many hours if he can get away with it. He, too, likes to make up stories and passes the grammar class with flying colors. The other, is opposite. She rarely even goes near a computer unless it's for school or checking her messages on Facebook.com. She, sadly, fails grammar and cannot spell very good.

"What if the child doesn't know five adults who will look over it, then they can't submit it to the publisher." That is what an editor is for! the editor can scan through the book, mark down all corrections that are needed, send it back, then wait for it to return for a second check. I do not mean to be rude, but to me, it's close to common knowledge.

"Also what if the adults are not competent enough to detect all errors? " Again, editor.

"You failed to argue my points, set up a faulty premise, and have never once provided a shred of empiric or analytic evidence." Not true. Like I said in the very first paragraph, I have little free time. But I did not fail to gather some evidence. I suggest you read my debates a little more carefully. Plus, I have been taught to argue my points through yours. What I mean is, my class started debates last week. Do not blame me for using what I know, not what I don't know.

"No I didn't and for that reason you must concede, it is your fault for not clarifying yourself and we default to the CON's definitions because yet agin you didn't provide any" First of all, I see a spelling mistake. Sorry to point that out, but that red line (Dots in this case) really bothers me. Anyway, mind you I do these debates at 9:30 P.M. here and I do have school to attend as well as a basketball game. I truly am sorry for not clarifying myself. I admit, I was dependent on common knowledge, meaning I was sure my opponent would understand when I said "kids" that I meant human children.

"So already the CON has won this debate. " I caught this a little late, but don't be so sure about yourself. To be honest (and hopefully not too rude), you are sounding like an idiot. I apologize, but it's true.

I look forward to your response, and I hope you do see some light on my topic (Figure of speech by the way). Since we might not debate each other again, I wish you well.
Cherymenthol

Con

Extend the kids point and once again vote CON, but on to the non-sequitur debate

First of all, just to let you and our debate readers know, I am doing this debate between school, homework, and basketball games. I have very little time to find my evidence. Besides, This is one of the very few times I can debate without much of a reason other than coming up with a great idea to debate about. This first paragraph is NOT actually part of this debate.

Just to point something else out: I am currently preparing for three national debate tournaments, presiding over 3 extracurricular clubs and a member of several more to boot, maintaing a 4.0 GPA, and having a social life, so don't buy this pathos fallacy. He is trying to pull out your emotions to get votes he does not deserve.

"And last I checked we already had these in the status quo, their called, "Creative Writing." Creative Writing IS a class, I agree with you there. BUT I'm asking for a whole class period, meaning (in Middle School's case) I'm asking to take one class, ONE CLASS period to let imaginations run wild. By running wild, I mean children are using their imaginations. Think of cartoonists. They have to use their imaginations from a child's point of view.

Okay we can do three things to this argument:

1. I have a complete, actual a block class, for creative writing, meaning I receive two periods a day. This shows how his position is faulty, so no argument

2. Concede the point. This means we have this class but it has no impact nor relation to publishing books, this class would solve for all the impacts of book publishing making them non-unique, which I already brought up mind you.

3. Look to the theory argument.

Most Christian parents do not allow their children to read books like "Harry Potter" because it involves magic.

1. No evidence fails to meet burden of proof.

2. Kids sneak things past their parents all the time, if they want to read it they will.

"Twilight" is a book book along with it's series, but many people I know don't care much for the books.

1. I will discuss in a moment your incessant use of "Friends" as a credible source. And also say the PRO knows three people and two don't like Twilight than bam thats "many people" so the argument is vague and we can drop it on face.

2. I am sure your friends are a great representation of the population seeing as how many tickets were sold to the movie, copies of the book sold, amongst other memorabilia…

Ask any Middle Schooler at the school I attend. Most will say they don't like to read anyway unless the book is really interesting.

1. Which these authors clearly are! You concede so with twilight, by calling it a book along itself.

I have not picked up any of James Patterson's books probably because they do not interest me or anybody else I know.

1. You do not represent American children just because you don't like it doesn't mean everyone doesn't. Which I do and my friends do so surely children in America do (this is sarcasm).

Another point I want to debate about is that children know what other children like in books more than adults. Most adults could never guess that quiet, kind student that gets straight A's likes books with dramatic deaths.

1. This is specific and untrue. I am quite and kind and get straight A's and I love philosophy.

And now about those lines that appear under mistakes. I'm sure you'd be surprised how many students end up yelling at the computer because they get so annoyed by the lines. What they do (Yes, I bring this up a lot. But I want my point to go through!) is learn how to avoid those lines, making them earn how to spell and use grammar a lot better. I bring two people into this debate for examples. One is a complete computer geek. He is on the computer for many hours if he can get away with it. He, too, likes to make up stories and passes the grammar class with flying colors. The other, is opposite. She rarely even goes near a computer unless it's for school or checking her messages on Facebook.com. She, sadly, fails grammar and cannot spell very good.

1. Yes how does this link into publishing books… It no correlation, the impacts are non-unique and extra-topical

2. Look to theory for what to do when extra-topical arguments are presented

"What if the child doesn't know five adults who will look over it, then they can't submit it to the publisher." That is what an editor is for! the editor can scan through the book, mark down all corrections that are needed, send it back, then wait for it to return for a second check. I do not mean to be rude, but to me, it's close to common knowledge.

So if a child doesn't have anyone to check their works we should have editors on standby ready to help them with poor grammar… I don't mean to be rude but this is not well thought out or pragmatic.

Not true. Like I said in the very first paragraph, I have little free time. But I did not fail to gather some evidence. I suggest you read my debates a little more carefully.

1. This is hilarious. You said the 1st paragraph is not part of the debate, so you have no link story anymore. Also you started the debate to not make time for it almost requires a loss because I am giving time and effort to actually argue your responses… something that wouldn't hurt you to do.

2. He never argued the faulty premise bit so we default CON again.

I truly am sorry for not clarifying myself. I admit, I was dependent on common knowledge, meaning I was sure my opponent would understand when I said "kids" that I meant human children.

And at this point at 1 in the morning… I do intend to sound rude drop grammar voters I don't care at this point. You are a bumbling moron you set up a debate with a faulty premise you haven't addressed one third of my points, you have never introduced sources once in this round, you try to get votes out of sympathy. Also if you truthfully wanted kids to learn proper grammar wouldn't you have set up a debate as such? I think yes! You need to be clear and debate well something you don't do, you say you learned to argue through my point well than do it! I haven't seen it! So if you really want to learn grammar you have to lose this debate you failed to define the resolution, then rather than giving a counter definition you start to whine. I am truthfully fed up with this kind of behavior! In reality this wouldn't fly, in my book you have no credibility as a debater. I honestly am considering leaving this website due to this debate alone.

THEORY

Interpretation: We are debating whether or not kids ought to be allowed to publish books.

Violation: My opponent incessantly brings up policy arguments such as classes to write books, and other things along those lines, rather than explicitly arguing the resolution.

Standards:

Word Skew: I have a set amount of characters and for him to force me to waste time both here and before pointing out how A) We already have these in the status quo, and B) We are not arguing these points.

Extra-topicality: By failing to argue the resolution he is being unfair. He sets up new mini-debates which once again have no bearing on the resolution or are non-unique.

Voter:

Fairness: We can not let him win this round he has done many things but this is one of the most unfair, he forces me to waste time clarifying a resolution and then fails to even argue it. If he wins of a truly non topical point this entire debate was meaningless.

Vote CON for the following reasons:

1. Kids can't nor should be allowed to publish books was never argued.

2. After round 2, he began on a rant about grammar which is non-unique, because its not what were debating.

3. He failed to meet the burden of proof, so by rule we default CON

4. He set up a faulty premise.

5. Theory, is apriori.

On a side note I concede Conduct… even if he called me an indict as well...
Please leave RFD's.
Debate Round No. 3
55 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Sky_ace25 7 years ago
Sky_ace25
RFD
Conduct-Pro Con forfeited this point
S&G-Tie, To be honest I was fed up with Con for pointing out errors left and right when he also had some himself, the fact is that when you start constantly referring to errors in the opponents case, your errors become these huge highlights that stay in my mind.

Convincing Arguments-Unfortunately Con, Pro was winning up till the last round where he became the nagging little kid and completely lost the vote. Con constantly stated that Pro could not speak for children, but a. Con never defines children as being under the age of 13 (easy win had you done this) b. Con to be fair your 19 I don't think your arguments on children can outweigh the 13 year old's opinion. To be fair however, Con always had the "appearance" that he was dominating, but Pro's arguments were acceptable especially since Con dropped his "goat" arguments. (I'm happy you did this, because I would be mad if I was reading an entire page on goats). Generally, my only advise is Con you need to be a little less cocky it makes you look bad for no reason, and Pro don't start nagging and whining in the FINAL ROUND, because that is a main thing that almost all voters look the most on. Pro you had the win...and you lost it...believe me most of us also are busy and have our own schedules you are no exception and further more I do agree with that mini-rant Con went on at the end of his case. Sorry, but you lowered yourself greatly during your final speech.
Reliable Sources-Tied...Con used to provide "goat" arguments, but those were dropped and sources weren't really used through rest of debate. Further more Con's weak "goat" sources are balanced with Pro's weak "my friend said" source.

Ultimately, Con won...Pro should have won.

P.S. Can somebody just explain this to me? Can't kids already publish books through adults? (You both referenced adult editors).
Posted by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
Cherymenthol
Flames can I get an RFD?
Posted by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
Cherymenthol
Oh... so I get it. Thank :)d
Posted by SexyLatina 7 years ago
SexyLatina
Actually, and I apologize for the double post:

Posted by LeafRod 1 day ago
LeafRod
I'd vote for a tie, because I don't think CON should get a win but it's also just a joke debate which doesn't merit a real loss.

Posted by SexyLatina 1 day ago
SexyLatina
I guess I'll back that up.
Posted by SexyLatina 7 years ago
SexyLatina
Cherymenthol was too tense.
Posted by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
Cherymenthol
Sexy Latina RFD?
Posted by bigtree 7 years ago
bigtree
@MTGandP, what are you smoking? Do you even know how to debate?
Posted by bigtree 7 years ago
bigtree
Con wins by so much. A kid was defined as a goat, so Pro's arguments get screwed over there. All of them.
Posted by Frosty5794 7 years ago
Frosty5794
We're supposed to vote on who was the better debater with the best arguements, and therefore CON easily wins. The second PRO speech dropped a lot, including his interpretation that kids=goats. You should have done a counter-interpretation that kids=human children.
Posted by Cherymenthol 7 years ago
Cherymenthol
I agree.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by ReDo 6 years ago
ReDo
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kikematsu 6 years ago
Kikematsu
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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:52 
Vote Placed by Sky_ace25 7 years ago
Sky_ace25
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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:13 
Vote Placed by Thade 7 years ago
Thade
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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:41 
Vote Placed by dpflames786 7 years ago
dpflames786
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 
Vote Placed by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by SexyLatina 7 years ago
SexyLatina
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 
Vote Placed by jborgen 7 years ago
jborgen
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 
Vote Placed by bigtree 7 years ago
bigtree
WolfSongCherymentholTied
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 
Vote Placed by Frosty5794 7 years ago
Frosty5794
WolfSongCherymentholTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00