The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Team debates on could work on version 3.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/8/2008 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,558 times Debate No: 5316
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)




Just in case you don't have video capabilities, I left the text option open. If you really want, I could even continue the debate in text. At the same time as debating if it could work, I also wouldn't mind trying it. So if anyone is interested, post in comments...

Let the debate begin!
Debate Round No. 1


I'm going to do this round as type because of time constraints. I typed it up very informally to not give my opponent any disadvantage. Everything written could fit in a 10 minute video. You can do text if you'd like, but my last round will be video. Thanks.

What's more suspicious? An account made "legally" if you will for team debates, or a dupe account made for the sole purpose of voting. I know not what details the admins can see, but if they know an account is made for team debates they'd be less likely to check it for cheating compared to an account that has let's say 100 votes and hasn't done a singe debate.

Passwords could be changed to prevent other party from logging in and fixing votes. Tons of email addresses would have to be made as well, because as far as I know you can't make a new account with an email already being used on

Don't play the semantics game, without the help from the comments I bet my opponent would not even of went there. Let us argue what we've gone with the first round, and not cast "semanticaga" as Logical Master puts it.

Yes, there are lazy people, and they cause problems. Let me use Logical Master an an example as well as football. I'm on a up and coming football team and we get logical master to play. Because of his actions we end up loosing the games. Just because we knew there were risks involved with playing him, does not mean we can't get mad at him because of his actions. Team debates will lead to feuds between members because one may particpate to their fullest, then feel cheated when their team mate forfeits or posts a horrible round. In order to prevent this team debates should not be allowed.

Perhaps teams should be recognized separately, but that would lead to too many accounts. There are probably upwards of 20 people I could team up with. Imagine if newscasters had to judge some football player 20 different times because he's on 20 different teams, then judge him separately, it could get overwhelming.

Again, feel free to respond in whatever format you'd like. I will be doing video in round 3.
Debate Round No. 2


I too will type this round because 1) I'm sick and 2) At school w/o video capabilities

Off of your first paragraph: It really doesn't matter which is more ‘suspicious' because (as I said before) cheaters will cheat no matter what. Certainly there are measures that can be taken (such as the new cell phone confirmations) but cheaters will (sadly) still exist. HOWEVER, with the team debates, there is a check and balance system, because two people would have access to the account so TWO people would be able to see whom is voting for whom.

Off of your second paragraph: Certainly passwords could be changed, but if you're playing the ‘suspicious' game that would be the first on the list (while the one you put on me is practically irrelevant). If someone changed the password, the partner that got locked out would inevitably tell everyone else on and the word would get out. In other words, someone couldn't just up and change it and expect to get away with it.

As far as the semantics game goes. I don't even know what argument you're talking about. I don't take arguments from the comment section and if I did, I would have suggested the single account with videos being posted argument. (2 people make arguments and one person posts the link on one account)… However, I did not take that argument because I would have considered it unfair.

In this paragraph, he goes completely off topic. What you have to see is that team debates CAN still work whether or not there are lazy people on the team. YES, bad teams will be made because of some lazy guy, BUT that doesn't mean that team debates can't work. Team debates CAN still work whether or not there are lazy members.

More accounts argument-->
1) Team debates can still exist.
2) More accounts equals more attention for (more accounts is not necessarily a bad thing… it's not like their debates are taking up the home page space)

I look forward to your response.


s0m31john forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by saamanthagrl 7 years ago
These were interesting
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
Don't fix what's not broken. Team debates would lead to too many problems. It's just not practical.
By the way, I enjoyed my shoutout. <3
Posted by Danielle 8 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA -- maybe if the win ratio affected every debater, they would be less likely to skip out on doing a round...?
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
I've got my speech done and saved but I can't upload it until I get home. I had to do the speech 3 times b/c of computer problems. *sigh
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Darn, I did a video but the sound didn't come through. Oh well. Hopefully will be up tonight.
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 8 years ago
You could just do actually team debates. That is you use this video function and say R1, Debater Q makes a video saying why we should legalize public nudity, and then R2 Nude Debater emails Debater Q his video, which Debater Q posts in R2, and then Debater Q goes in R3, et cetera. I disagree with sOme1john's argument that one debater might be lazy. If I pick a debate partner for this partner debate, I wouldn't pick someone who I thought was going to skip out on me, and leave me empty handed with a forfeit in R2. Also, the win ratio thing. Under my plan, you simply use Debater Q's account, and Nude Debater just sends Debater Q his video posts. While Nude Debater would not be affected, next time Nude Debater could use his account, and Debater Q would send him the videos. While my idea isn't elegant, it does work.
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
I gotta say, s0m31john made some pretty compelling arguments. It's like he is one move away from checkmate. You'd best cast semanticaga in the next round.

And yeah, I am pretty lazy, john. :D
Posted by s0m31john 8 years ago
Youtube is down for maintenance. It'll be back up in no time.
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
Wat? Both V.D.Os are unavailable?!
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PRO's R1: "This video is no longer available". Just another flaw with V.D.O. debates.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Johnicle 8 years ago
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 s0m31john 8 years ago
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