The Instigator
Zealotical
Con (against)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
Ruperttheg
Pro (for)
Winning
41 Points

Should violent video games be banned?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+10
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 8 votes the winner is...
Ruperttheg
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/22/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 77,733 times Debate No: 7721
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (8)

 

Zealotical

Con

If you choose to debate against me, you are for video game banning and against violent video games.

Here are my thoughts:

First of all, I'm tired of hearing kid under age breaking laws and video game companys taking the blame for it. If the kids can't tell the difference between reality and virtual reality then they don't need to be playing those games. Their parents should pay more attention to their kids and some games are rated by age group because your suppose to be at least a certain age to play that game. They shouldn't let their kids play the games that they are not old enough for.

Society has decided to embrace violent video games, which as a result are very profitable. These games are written for adults, rather than children and the ratings system warns of any violent content. In a modern world, the role of protecting young people should lie with responsible parents who know their kids best and take an active interest in their leisure time, discouraging or barring them from unsuitable activities. In this case, there is not enough justification for governments to intervene in people's leisure time.
Ruperttheg

Pro

Hello, my name is Keenan Harris, I will be arguing the Proposition that, "Violent Video Games should be banned". Before I start on my own points I would like to go over a few of my opponent's highly absurd points.

First of all, It does not matter whether the opposition may be "tired" of hearing about instances of crime, or instances where children commit suicide after playing a video game. These things happen, the fact that parents these days allow young children to play games as damaging as Grand Theft Auto or Gears of War actually helps our side. Since parents these days are too lazy to censor what their kids our playing, it makes sense for the government to intervene and stop video game related deaths from happening. The mere fact that we should make the parents of America be more diligent about giving their kids games would not work, like it is not working today. In this day and age there is a rating system, put our by the ESRB that does not allow people under the age of 17 to buy M rated games and does not allow children under the age of 13 buy Teen or "T" rated games. Even though this system is enforced by law, the Youth of America still manages to obtain copies of these game either through irresponsible parents, or through black market suppliers. Since this rating system obviously doesn't work, and there are still suicides occurring because of Violent video games, we need to take steps to make sure that no more children will die from violent video games, and if this means banning them for good then I am sure that we can all sacrifice Halo 3 so that we can be sure that the youth of america can be safe.

I'm sure after all that talk about suicides you want some hard evidence that people actually do die from violent video games. Well here it is. According to tech.blourge <http://tech.blorge.com...; a ten year old child in moscow jumped off a 19 story building after loosing video game privileges. Not only did said child suffer a terrible death, the same study showed that as he got more and more interested in video games, his grades in school began to plummet. This study concluded that not only do gamers quickly turn to suicide, but video games also impair school performance. And that was only one case, recently, a 14 year old boy HUNG himself after his Runescape account was canceled, another 12 year old boy jumped out of his apartment building to his death after World of Warcraft was taken away from him for a week. All these cases are undeniable proof that we cannot allow video games to exist any longer. So please, spare us of one more video game related death and ban video games, for good.

My opponent's second point was. Our society has learned to embrace the atrocity of video games. How dare you! Just because society has learned to embrace something that does not, in any way, mean that it is good! At one time, our society embraced heroine as a legal substance, and Cock fighting as a chivalrous sport. Violent Video Games are vile! They depict prostitution, gang violence, mass murder, and law breading in a good light, and in consequence our youth of america follows the lead of the game. No matter how profitable the industry may be, it will always be one of the leading causes of teenage suicide. And how can any company be good for the world with that on its shoulders? How can it be? Before the video game industry, the capital produced by all the combined book publishers, and book manufacturing companies equaled that of our current video game industry. The source for that is the science group Nova. Thats all I have to say for the matter now. But look into your heart, save future deaths from occurring, and vote PRO!
Debate Round No. 1
Zealotical

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

"I'm sure after all that talk about suicides you want some hard evidence that people actually do die from violent video games. Well here it is. According to tech.blourge <http://tech.blorge.com......; a ten year old child in moscow jumped off a 19 story building after loosing video game privileges. Not only did said child suffer a terrible death, the same study showed that as he got more and more interested in video games, his grades in school began to plummet. This study concluded that not only do gamers quickly turn to suicide, but video games also impair school performance. And that was only one case, recently, a 14 year old boy HUNG himself after his Runescape account was canceled, another 12 year old boy jumped out of his apartment building to his death after World of Warcraft was taken away from him for a week. All these cases are undeniable proof that we cannot allow video games to exist any longer. So please, spare us of one more video game related death and ban video games, for good."

It isn't the video game's fault that people commit these crimes and such. It is the individual's fault for not having common sense! I'm not going to deny that people do kill themselves over these games, however, if these people are stupid enough to commit such acts, then they are probably better off dead because it would be less stupid people in the world and also it would reduce population. This world is over-populated anyways.

"How dare you! Just because society has learned to embrace something that does not, in any way, mean that it is good!"

It doesn't AUTOMATICALLY mean it is bad either. At least we would give someone or something a chance. You never know if it is good or bad until you have given it a chance. For examples, Humans eat food. If we didn't give food a chance, we would probably starve to death.

"At one time, our society embraced heroine as a legal substance, and Cock fighting as a chivalrous sport. Violent Video Games are vile! They depict prostitution, gang violence, mass murder, and law breading in a good light, and in consequence our youth of america follows the lead of the game. No matter how profitable the industry may be, it will always be one of the leading causes of teenage suicide. And how can any company be good for the world with that on its shoulders? How can it be? Before the video game industry, the capital produced by all the combined book publishers, and book manufacturing companies equaled that of our current video game industry. The source for that is the science group Nova. Thats all I have to say for the matter now. But look into your heart, save future deaths from occurring, and vote PRO!"

Again, It isn't the video game's fault that people commit these crimes and such. It is the individual's fault for not having common sense!

Video Games can be used to help stress. For example, if I was mad at my dad for yelling at me for stupid reasons, Instead of trying to hurt him or kill him, I could just play video games to calm me down. In situations like that, Video Games would save lives and prevent people from turning into criminals or possibly murderers.
Ruperttheg

Pro

Hello. Before I start my debate I would first like to thank my opponent for posting such a well thought out rebuttal and for entertaining the many points that I have brought up in my debate. I would now like to start my construct by refuting my opponents points and revealing the flaws and obvious disregard for human life that my opponent has brought up in his speech.

First of all, my opponent said that gamers that killed them self because of psychological trauma caused by video games. This is sickening! All people, no matter if their IQ is low or if they are flipping burgers at McDonalds deserve to live. Those people who, upon buying the game thought that the game would be safe, that no matter how much they play the game, they would still retain some amount of sanity. I would agree with my opponent, that if a person played a game for hours upon hours that they should live with the consequences of being irresponsible. But my opponent did not tell the whole story. According to the American Psychological Association, or APA < http://www.psychologymatters.org... > children who play violent video games have increased aggression, violent video games stimulate the dopamine receptors in the brain which cause children to actually become addicted to the game as one would become addicted to heroine or methamphetamine, and since violent video games are more engaging and interactive than other games they are almost twice as addictive. Another doctor from the APA Doctor Anderson determined that violent video games do increase violent feelings in young children, and even in adults. The same study also concluded that violent video games make children more impulsive and therefore more prone to act rashly and jump off a building because of video game withdrawal. Because video games are addicting, you cannot put all the fault on the individual. Some video game manufacturers like Blizzard intentionally manufacture video games to be addictive so they will sell more subscriptions and so people will buy expansion packs. So the whole story is, video games can hurt anybody, not just what my opponent so flippantly calls "stupid people". The psychological and emotional scarring these violent video games have on children can effect even the most outstanding student, and that is why we as responsible American citizens should ban video games. For the sake of our children, and the future generations of our society. For who knows how many future doctors or politicians may have been killed by the emotional scarring effects of violent video games. Its just sickening...

On a side note, my opponent was saying that is somehow good that victims of violent video games were meeting a pre-mature demise because they were somehow "stupid". I have already proven that this is not true and the psychological effects of video games extend from the developmentally delayed to our present day Einsteins but just to entertain the idea. You are saying that murder on the part of the video game industry is somehow justified, that these people "are probably better off dead" because they enjoyed playing a violent video game, and that violent video games serve as some kind of a cleanser of the worlds idiots. The boy from Moscow I talked about earlier was getting average, if not above average grades in school before he first got a violent video game. But when he started playing more and more, his grades went from a A to a B slowly down to D's and F's. Perhaps the "stupid people" you talk of were made stupid by the video game. It certainly makes sense from the evidence shown by the American Psychological association. Think on that for a while... Violent video games, making the youth of the world, imbeciles.

Second of all, my opponent's next argument was that "just because people embrace something it doesn't mean that is automatically bad." He then went on to say that we need to give video games a chance before we ban them completely, after that he then went on to compare video games to food which, apart from being an extremely drastic circumstance, helps my point about video games being addictive. Moving on however, we have given video games quite enough of a chance. The first really violent video game coming out between the years of 1995 (the year of my birth) and 1996. from that fateful day what seemed to be like a corny game with some benign bloody parts has turned into a horrifying blood-fest, complete with intestines and brains. Currently, World of Warcraft solely causes 30 deaths per year (that's one game!) and that totaled with all the other violent video games comes out to be almost 2,000 deaths per year, or to put that into perspective, five deaths per day! I think we have given video games, PLENTY chance, now is time for action. Just think, If we ban video games, we will be saving 2,000 lives, per year.

For my opponent's final point, I ask you. How many accident's have been prevented, or lives saved, from playing a video game? Do you have any solid proof that anyone aside from yourself actually relieves stress via playing a brutal video game. Do you? In fact, I have heard of one such case. A kid, around 7 or 8 years old got yelled at by his father, who happened to be a police man, this child took much the same path that you did, he played a game called "Red Dead Revolver" to "relieve stress" but one day, because of the psychological defects caused by video games, instead of picking up the virtual revolver in the game, he picked up his dad's 9 mm revolver, and killed 3 people before finally shooting himself. This kid was 7 years old for god's sake! Are video games really a good way of relieving stress? We have sports for relieving stress, our children could learn to SOCIALIZE and make some friends instead of becoming a virtual mass murderer. Think of all the other alternatives that do not involve a Playstation or your computer and ask yourself, are video games good for our youth? Or are they the leading cause of adolescent insanity? Ask yourself this, and vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
Zealotical

Con

Before I start with Round 3 I would like to thank my opponent for his really good comebacks. He is a very worthy opponent, Now on with the round.

"First of all, my opponent said that gamers that killed them self because of psychological trauma caused by video games. This is sickening! All people, no matter if their IQ is low or if they are flipping burgers at McDonalds deserve to live. Those people who, upon buying the game thought that the game would be safe, that no matter how much they play the game, they would still retain some amount of sanity. I would agree with my opponent, that if a person played a game for hours upon hours that they should live with the consequences of being irresponsible."

No one lives forever anyways except for Chuck Norris however, Chuck Norris doesn't play video games. God is afraid of his round house kicks therefore, he lives forever! http://www.chacha.com...

Even if video games are responsible for these suicides, if these people didn't "die from playing violent video games" then they probably would of died of other things like car crashes, cancer, heart attack, etc... If you ban video games you might as well ban vehicles. There are a lot of things that are responsible for deaths and suicides other than video games. A lot of people get depressed because of their boyfriend/girlfriend broke up with them and/or cheated on them and that depression leads to suicide. Video Games helps depression because it takes your mind off of them. Sports can also help you to relieve stress and depression however, sports are more dangerious than video games. If you ban video games then you would have to ban wrestleing. Wrestleing is more violent then violent video games because wrestleing is real and video games are virtual. In virtual reality no real people gets hurt. If you are playing just about any sport, there is a higher chance you can get hurt or possibly killed.

"children who play violent video games have increased aggression, violent video games stimulate the dopamine receptors in the brain which cause children to actually become addicted to the game as one would become addicted to heroine or methamphetamine, and since violent video games are more engaging and interactive than other games they are almost twice as addictive. Another doctor from the APA Doctor Anderson determined that violent video games do increase violent feelings in young children, and even in adults. The same study also concluded that violent video games make children more impulsive and therefore more prone to act rashly and jump off a building because of video game withdrawal. Because video games are addicting, you cannot put all the fault on the individual. Some video game manufacturers like Blizzard intentionally manufacture video games to be addictive so they will sell more subscriptions and so people will buy expansion packs. So the whole story is, video games can hurt anybody, not just what my opponent so flippantly calls "stupid people". The psychological and emotional scarring these violent video games have on children can effect even the most outstanding student, and that is why we as responsible American citizens should ban video games. For the sake of our children, and the future generations of our society. For who knows how many future doctors or politicians may have been killed by the emotional scarring effects of violent video games. Its just sickening..."

Everyone likes to blame the video games and the game companies when really it's the children's fault for being irresponsible and/or the parent's fault for not . Violet video games aren't really meant to promote violents in real life. It is meant to take your anger out on virtual people rather than real people. In the game you can do things that you can't do in real life. Society has been pretty bad in america recently and some people want to get away from it for a little while.

2,000 deaths a year isn't that bad considering there are over 6 billion people on this planet and there are a lot of things out there that are way worse like smoking, drinking and driving, misuse of weapons, etc... There are nearly 5 million deaths a year from smoking. http://www.quitsmokingsupport.com...

If you think about it, Violent video games are nothing compared to cigarettes, drugs, etc... We should focus less on banning video games and more on banning cigarettes, beer, etc...

"On a side note, my opponent was saying that is somehow good that victims of violent video games were meeting a pre-mature demise because they were somehow "stupid". I have already proven that this is not true and the psychological effects of video games extend from the developmentally delayed to our present day Einsteins but just to entertain the idea. You are saying that murder on the part of the video game industry is somehow justified, that these people "are probably better off dead" because they enjoyed playing a violent video game, and that violent video games serve as some kind of a cleanser of the worlds idiots. The boy from Moscow I talked about earlier was getting average, if not above average grades in school before he first got a violent video game. But when he started playing more and more, his grades went from a A to a B slowly down to D's and F's. Perhaps the "stupid people" you talk of were made stupid by the video game. It certainly makes sense from the evidence shown by the American Psychological association. Think on that for a while... Violent video games, making the youth of the world, imbeciles."

There are educational violent video games. For example, in Resident Evil 5, the game teaches you how to work with your partner to solve puzzles and everything. It teaches you that teamwork is good! In Saints Row 2, there are side missions where you can play as a cop and it teaches you sort of what it is like to be a cop and you can also play as somewhat, a doctor and it somewhat shows you what it is like to be one. You can do good things on some violent video games like Fable. In that game you have a choice of being good or evil. On games like that, it depends on the person. He can make the game play very violent or he could make it as least violent as possible. What I am trying to say is that it isn't the games fault, it's the person playing the game's fault. It was their choice. The game or the game company didn't force them to make those decisions or to play the game for that matter.

Even if we do ban video games, people are still going to try to find ways to play the ones that have already came out and banning them is just going to make people learn how to be more sneaky and then they will try to steal things and maybe even become murderers because if they can sneak by with video games and drugs, they will get the impression that they might be able to get away with anything.

Again, I would like to thank my opponent for challenging me and I would also like to say that this was a very good debate. Please vote CON so we may have our rights to play these video games so people will only be virtual criminals and prevent them from becoming real life criminals!
Ruperttheg

Pro

Before starting my 3rd and final construct I would like to thank my opponent for taking time out of his day to deliver his construct. Also, another note to the judges, I would urge you not to vote for the person you necessarily agree with, but the person who gives the best and most cited arguments. I would like to point out that my opponent has not brought up any sources to back up his argument whatsoever, and the only links he put up either pertained to Chuck Norris or Smoking so I would advise you take into consideration that you would be taking a 17 year old's word over the American Psychological Association's by voting con. Now, without further interruption, I would like to start by refuting my opponent's points.

My opponent said, during his very first point, that people who die of video games would have died anyways, because of car crashes, swine flu, or just plain old age. I'm sorry if I sound rude, but this is a terrible point! How would you like it if you died right now, without having the privilege that so many others have had of living life to it's fullest? To you mothers and fathers on debate.org , how would you like it, If your son or daughter got life altering psychological trauma from playing a video game and committed suicide like that poor boy in Moscow, or even worse, committed mass murder like the 7 year old boy I talked about earlier who just couldn't handle the violence in Red Dead Revolver any more? How would you like that? To have your child's life brutally taken away by a game... and then, to top it off, my opponent is saying that it was okay that they died, that it was okay that they died before the age of 10, or that these evil, abominable video games caused them to kill innocent people because of psychological trauma caused by the video game. Human life is precious, if it wasn't why would we feel joy at the sight of a newborn baby, or grief and sorrow at the sight of a deceased loved one? And to think that video games are causing the crime of murder is enough by itself to have them banned for good.

The next piece of fallacious reasoning that came from my opponent's construct was this:

"There are a lot of things that are responsible for deaths and suicides other than video games. A lot of people get depressed because of their boyfriend/girlfriend broke up with them and/or cheated on them and that depression leads to suicide. Video Games helps depression because it takes your mind off of them. Sports can also help you to relieve stress and depression however, sports are more dangerous than video games."

Not only did my opponent fail to bring up any evidence that video games can relieve stress. He then went on to say that sports are too dangerous to play and that video games are a safer alternative. Have you failed to hear any of my evidence?!?! Video games are highly dangerous, not only to one's physical self, but to their mental and intellectual self as well. These violent video games overload the dopamine receptors in your brain, much like what cocaine or heroine does. The effect on one's body this has is more dangerous than even the most gruesome sports injury you can imagine. The child, or adult, in question starts to become extremely jumpy and jittery, much like someone with a severe mental injury, then the gamer will start to become used to the amount of dopamine flowing to his brain and he will begin to become addicted to the game in question. While this is happening, the study done by the APA showed that the gamer's grades would start to become poorer and poorer and that they would become more and more obese. In my earlier constructs I have talked about stress related deaths caused by video games, but obesity is another problem they they produce. Currently half a million people die from obesity related deaths per year and video games are largely inflating that number. Since the creation of the first violent, addictive, video game the obesity rate has almost tripled in number according to not only the APA, but Jayashree Pakhare, the center for disease control, and almost any medical professional on the web, trust me, google it. If we continue to let such a rampant killer exist in America then I and anyone who has ever lost someone to the horrors of violent video games truly pity your ignorance.

My opponent's next point was that video games don't mean to kill people. There's a word for that, it's manslaughter, and if you commit half a million counts of it per year, then you would most likely be subject to the capital punishment. Video games kill an amount equal to the number of people living in Alaska currently, per year. This is insane! We currently have a case of flu (swine flu) going around America that has killed 86 people. We all know that even death is terrible but video games kill 6,000 times as many people than swine flu has but we still generally except video games as "okay". How can this be?!?! Put an end to the injustice of violent video games and vote PRO!

Before I end my case, and beg you profusely to vote for me like my opponent has previously done. I would like to put an image in your mind of what violent video games teach children to do...

A child, around the age of 5. Is standing in a room carrying an AK-47 along with several grenades. As he is exploring the room, he finds a dog. The dog in question, is in no way threatening, in fact, it's more like a puppy. Rather than say things like "awww" or "how cute" this 5 year old child laughs, aims his rifle, and shoots off one of the dog's legs. But he isn't over yet. He proceeds to walk up to the dog and kick it repeatedly in the side until it is barely able to even cry, or whimper anymore. He then takes out a grenade, shoves it down the dog's throat, and walks away. This, my friend, is the horror of violent video games. Thank you. I hope you now realize just how awful, and how much our country, how much our world, needs violent video games, to be done away with... Vote pro, and make sure that the image I have shown you never... becomes a reality.
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by green_converse 2 years ago
green_converse
the affirmative debater had some extremely strong arguments, that last one was like BAM!!! in your FACE strong. congratz, bro :)
Posted by smaug 2 years ago
smaug
Congrats on winning pro, although con was really easy.
Con could have made way better comebacks, though.
For example, he could have said that the fact that he was tired of people blaming video games was a reason to begin this debate, and thus your remark on it was unnecessary.
He could have refuted your argument about suicide, as the title was clearly "should VIOLENT games be banned", not "should addictive games be banned"
He should have said that those victims probably were emotionally weak in other words than he did, and your opinion that gaming could make you stupid was based on the retrograding notes, which were more plausible caused by the fact that the game took up the time he should have spent on his homework.
He could have asked for proof for some stands you made.
And personally I would have said that the fact that many children who commit crimes play violent video games, is because most children play violent video games, not because the games cause violence.
Sorry for my bad English, I'm Dutch.
Posted by Cyrus75 3 years ago
Cyrus75
Con, your wrong banning violent video games destroys not litarly our freedom of speech
Posted by smillygod 4 years ago
smillygod
Scientist say that when u play a violent video game such as GTA series or Gears Of War that it lets out steam and aggression and i dont want to come home and go play a game about planting flowers or washing dishes i want to come home and shoot stuff in the face
Posted by kevin1110 4 years ago
kevin1110
con your source are fake. that's not proper source.
Posted by hit268 4 years ago
hit268
Pro, your forgetting one thing. At the end (very end) you said about the boy killing the dog and stuff but you didn't prove that it was because it was video game's fault. The reason could be the child's dad got drunk every night and he abused him EVERY NIGHT! So, the boy couldn't take it anymore. So he took his dad's ak-47 off the wall in his room and killed his dad. But, he couldn't trust anyone. He thinks everyone is going to abuse him. So he goes on a rampage killing a lot of people. So, he see's people and enjoys killing people. And thats the reason why e killed the dog. Next time think of every possible answer someone could use. So that just proves that he couldn't have killed that dog because of video games.
So it wasn't a bit much. It was a bit NOTHING!!! Oh and i bet half of the people here voting for pro plays violent video games anyway.
Posted by MasterChief722 5 years ago
MasterChief722
There was one flaw in Ruperttheg's argument, he talks about kids becoming suicidle when their games are taken away. Well if u ban thier games then they will continue to kill themselves, and is that what u want?
Posted by rougeagent21 5 years ago
rougeagent21
Although I strongly agree with the negative side, PRO was the better debater. Points to him for debating, but my opinion is still not swayed.
Posted by Chase_the_Bass 5 years ago
Chase_the_Bass
It's obvious that Rupert was the better debater here. But it is also obvious that he resorted to fear mongering which I disagree with. "these violent video games overload the dopamine receptors in your brain, much like what cocaine or heroine does." this sentence almost angered me. First of all the dopamine is released because games are rewarding. You are assigned a task, you accomplish it, and you feel good. To compare this to intravenously injecting heroin is simply a scare tactic that I think we all should be above.

There are many positive effects attributed to playing video games including faster hand-eye coordination, strategic thinking, cooperative participation, careful analyzing of in-game risk, and...stress relief. Another personal account here.

I do however believe that time spent playing, and your child's general behavior, should be monitored by a parent. Not because games are inherently evil, but because children oftentimes are not able to put things into perspective.
Posted by Ruperttheg 5 years ago
Ruperttheg
I just thought that I'd have some fun at the end. I guess it was a bit much.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Smil3_4Fun 5 years ago
Smil3_4Fun
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 FlashFire 5 years ago
FlashFire
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 Seerss 5 years ago
Seerss
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by Zealotical 5 years ago
Zealotical
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 sherlockmethod 5 years ago
sherlockmethod
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 Ruperttheg 5 years ago
Ruperttheg
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 pewpewpew 5 years ago
pewpewpew
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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 Lexicaholic 5 years ago
Lexicaholic
ZealoticalRupertthegTied
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