The Instigator
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
koolkid
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

The Australian education system should united and be the same level as the Nsw education system

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 3 votes the winner is...
koolkid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/27/2012 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,055 times Debate No: 22352
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (18)
Votes (3)

 

d1a6r7s1h9i9t8

Pro

Australian education system is different throughout Australia
In this debate I will try to prove that Australian education should be same throughout the nation
As the affirmative i define the topic as a possible way to change australian education system for the good of the nation
At the moment NSW students have the hardest eduction system which means the rest of Australia students are not capable of being equivalent to Nsw students.
If Australian donot study the same things they would not be capable of moving out their particular state as the education system in that state maybe too hard for the students to adapt.

If you donot want your students (Non Nsw students) to suffer support The unification of the Australian Education System
koolkid

Con

Affirmative's case: The Australian education should be the same throughout the entire nation.

Con's case: The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education.

Since pro did not include definitions, I will provide the definitions that will be used for the remainder of this debate:

DEFINITIONS:

1. Education: The process of receiving or giving systematic instruction

2. Nation: Entire country

3. Equivalent: Equal

The general idea of having the education of within Australia being united has major disadvantages. There are many factors that must be taken into account if such a law was to become implemented. It will affect the education of those who are:

1. Naturally Gifted and Talent (also known as GAT) and hard workers.
2. Affected with a learning disabilities
3. Immigration

Arguments:

Gifted and Talented:

Within any given background, 99% of the time there is at least one student who wishes to excel within their studies and the amount of work given to them during class is simply not enough. The education within any average school in NSW is not enough for a student to receive their maximum potential in life.

Many students believe that they lack enough education just within the school and therefore seek for further learning material outside of school. They spend money on other materials to aid them in their education outside of school. This can either be done because they are falling behind or simply because they wish to study more for a better job.

The same thing can be applied to those students outside of NSW who are not receiving the same level of education at their school. If they believe that they are not learning enough within their own school, they themselves re able to do something about it. Some options include going some extensive coaching, studying more online or simply buying the books neccesarry for their learning. We humans are smart enough to know whether we wish to study more or not.

Those with LEARNING DISSABILITIES:

Pro's resolution clearly was " that Australian education should be same throughout the nation". He therefore implies that the education for EVERY STUDENT within Australia must be the same. This is proven as a very unreasonable as there are those who have learning disabilities within specific schools in Australia. These disabilities make creates difficulties for those students to learn, and therefore will not be able to progress at the same rate as required by the education provided by the government. Some of these disabilities that can be taken note of include:

1. Those who are visually impaired
2. Those with ADHD
3. Those who are audibly impaired.

Just to name a few.

By trying to create the same education system for all the students in Australia, those with learning difficulties can create a big gap between those without. In schools with students who suffer from learning difficulties, they are given a much less demanding workload for obvious reasons. It will illogical to change the education system for "the good of the nation" as claimed by pro in his first argument.

English as a SECOND LANGUAGE:

There are a lot of students in Australia who study English as their second language. The main reason is because their family migrated from a different country and decided to live in Australia. Those from Asian countries are a common example.

The point that I am trying to make is that those who are learning English as their second language should not be disadvantaged by being forced to be put into the same education as those who have English as their first tongue. This will not only create major difficulties in their studies of English, but also create difficulties to understand the material being taught during class.

This is commonly why most school in Australia (Primary school, Middle school and High School) have an "ESL" (English as Second Language) unit for students who are newly migrated to Australia. It provides them a more comfortable setting and allows them to study at a more reasonable/suitable pace for their level of education.

The implementation of this "one education system" for all students currently in Australia will not be a reasonable option.

CONCLUSION:

The disadvantages of creating an "education system that is the same throughout the nation" clearly outweighs the advantages. One must take into concern that it will affect the studies of those who having learning difficulties and those who have English as their second tongue. Educated readers may also note that uniting the education system in Australia as one will benefit none of those students who are naturally gifted and talented.

It is now up to Pro to prove to use why implementing this "one education" system for the entire nation will actually be beneficial.

Onto pro to make his second argument...
Debate Round No. 1
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8

Pro

Before I start my case i would like to point out some flaws in the opponents arguments. Con has clearly proven that he doesnot know the education system of NSW or may have misinterpreted the meaning of education systemi would like to define a key words to clear some misinterpretation which the opponent as had in Round 1
Education system - It is a system which educates and caters for all students of all abilities. Thusit should be obvious that thegifted and talented students will be doing harder things and extensionsatschool whilst the students with disabilities would be doing things whichwill be compatible with their abilities.This means when the opponent assumed that GAT students and students with a learning disabilities won't have different education systemhe/she was wrong which means its first 2 arguments were wrong and a result of an innocent and rushed assumption.
The opponents have stated that immigrants will struggle with thenew education systembut the reality is all immigrants still suffer with the current education systemas its different education system to the one they(immigrants) were used to in their home country. Therefore the last con's arguments is also pointless.Now iwould like to start my casei agree with the definitions conhas made but disagree with""one education system" for all students currently in Australia" implification.

Firstly the main reason why australia education system should be united to make all student equally learned. There are many Gifted and talented students (GAT)around Australia but they are not equally smart as they allgo through a different education system depending on th state they live in.

So are all the GAT students in Australia equally smart ? Yes and NoYes, Because if GAT students from NSW travel elsewhere theystillwill remain GATas theyStudy the hardest education system but No for all the rest of The Gat students.Same sort of things happen with Hsc students UAI and ATARwhen they travel to different states for University admission. There score will either increase or decrease depending on the state theyare travelling to. But if the education system was equal throughout the nation Then the problems stated above will never occur. Thus The Australian education system should be united.

Second and the last argument
As per the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment ) Australian education is 3 years behind. This information has some defects asnot all the students in Australia learn the same thing. It is also highly likely PISA have used NSW education system for their assessment. Thus chances that other state government education system are more than 3 years behind is very likely. Hence if every one used Nsw education system then that state will start producing more smarter and maybe hardworking learners.
koolkid

Con

Ladies and gentlemen. I would like to point out that my opponent (pro) has not only misunderstood my argument in round 1, but surprisingly misread his own argument in round 1. To quote part of his argument in Round 1, it goes as follows:

"In this debate I will try to prove that Australian education should be same throughout the nation" Although this is not a very precisely given resolution, we can still gather that his resolution stands clear:

Pro's Resolution: The Australian "education" should be the same throughout the nation.

NOT that the Australian education system should be the same throughout the entire nation. He used the New South Wales education system to support his claim, but did not put that forth as his resolution for this entire debate. To prove my point, here are some further quotes from his Round 1 argument:

"As the affirmative i define the topic as a possible way to change australian education system for the good of the nation."
This above quote relates to the already given topic.

Therefore, we can already conclude that my arguments still stand clear and all of PRO's rebuttals are merely red herrings to my arguments. He has failed to understand his own resolution that was submitted in the first round.

Just to point out my point further, one of pro's arguments was not only irrelevant to his side of this debate, but was a supporting argument for Con. He has proven that the New South Wales education system caters for students of a variety of levels, which therefore leads us to the following question:

"Which education should be used as the one for the entire nation?" The education system in New South Wales is very complicated, with levels suited for people who are GAT and students who are not even up to the same level as an average expected standard.

Pro also claims that immigrants still suffer from the current education system. However, he is not completely right in this statement. Within normal government-funded schools, there is an ESL (English as Second Language) system branched out to students who are in need for such treatment.

Unfortunately, Pro has once again mistaken my final argument as invalid. However, as it follows the topic of this debate, I am indeed arguing towards my own resolution. It goes as follows:

Con's Resolution: The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education.

Readers must realise by now how mistaken Pro has been with his own topic of this debate.

I have put forth arguments that relate to the topic of this debate and my opponent has failed to do so. My argument stand forth and Pro must argue against them.

REBUTTALS:

While Pro has argued that New South Wales has the “hardest” education system in whole of Australia, I think he was trying to say that New South Wales has the best achieving students (as an average). If this is his point, I would like to just prove to him just how wrong he is. [1] The scores of the NAPLAN prove that states such as Victoria or ACT are either achieving similar, if not better results than NSW.

My opponent has also failed to realise that he wishes to prove why all of the education should imitate those of NSW to “benefit the nation”. I wish to point out that Australia is actually one of the lowest scoring nations compared to all the other countries. The education in Asian countries are far ahead of those in Australia. This means, it will not be benefitting our nation that much at all.

EXTEND ALL ARGUMENTS.

I would also like to advise my opponent to check their spelling and grammar as it is clearly of a very low standard. He should be advised that he will lose points for bad spelling and grammar.

RESOURCES:
1. http://www.nap.edu.au...

Debate Round No. 2
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8

Pro

d1a6r7s1h9i9t8 forfeited this round.
koolkid

Con

Pro has forfeited this round of the debate. My arguments still stand clear. I await his response for the 4th round.

It's a pity he couldn't respond on time.
Debate Round No. 3
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8

Pro

Ladies and gentleman,
I would like to highlight some flaws in my opponents case. I do agree that I had a typo in round one but sadly the opponent have misunderstood my burden of proof for a resolution.

As I am from the pro side it should be obvious that The topic should be my resolution. Thus i mentioned a Burden of proof.

Con's resolution : "The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education." has some major and obvious errors.

AS per my interpretation Con has stated that "The Australian education should remain the same" which support my argument and the topic and is false as Australia has state level learning system not nation level. Thus con's resolution is already wrongly word and supports my case.

Furthermore Con has written "have a variety of styles with education." to end his/her resolution. This contradicts the first part of the resolution. Thus Con have a very contradicting resolution which has been poverly worded.

Furthermore Con(my foolish opponent) has stated my arguements are a mere red herring but has failed to realise that they are not only using a contradicting resolution which supports my case but also he/she are arguing against the wrong topic.

For the last 3 rounds Con has only argued against my burden of proof which they think it is the resolution and the topic of the debate. I tried to fix my arguements in round 2 by stating the meaning of "education system" but also made 3 relevant arguements which supports my case and the Topic "The Australian education system should united and be the same level as the Nsw education system".

Whereas my opponent has stated argument against my burden of proof rather than the topic.

My opponent has proved that he is truly terrible and pathetic at researching strong refrences. Naplan is a decent source but i would like to ask my opponent this question.
Where would find smart students in Australia? NSW, ACT or VIC
I vote for NSW as i donot know of students that are smarter or of equivalent intelligence of the students in James Ruse Agricultural High school. The school which comes top in the state in Naplan and HSC. Have you got a school which can match the excellence of James Ruse in VIC or ACT.

Naplan test is an easy test unlike the UNSW ICAS test or The HSC. Compare something which is actually hard. Even my High school which came 120th in the HSC did extremely well in the Naplan. Does that mean students at my school are actually smart? I donot think so. In the common maths test majority of students in my class got below 40/65. How can you justify Naplan to see the diffrences between education system?


Thus my argument stand and are actually right and relevant to the topic unlike my opponents argument which are related to the topic but he has mentioned that they are against my burden of proof not the topic.

To finish of my case for round 4 I would like to tell my opponents somethings.
Hunger for education and success via fierce determination and burning desire is the key to success and all challenges in life. We humans have the capacity to achieve marvellous things as long as we never quit, donot accept no or harsh words, have fierce determination, are willing to work hardwork and have a burning desire we can achieve the impossible. Con, one advice please donot come up with the arguements that students will struggle just because you may have been struggling in your education endavour doesnot mean everyone will struggle.

Thank you
Readers and Con for the condolence(I did run out of time)
Good luck Con
Awaiting your reply for round 4
koolkid

Con

Thank you pro for being on time.

It appears that a misunderstanding of the topic has approached. Pro has actually put forth TWO resolutions in his first round. To quote for the second time round:

His first resolution: "I will try to prove that Australian education should be same throughout the nation" (the resolution that I followed).

His SECOND resolution (put forth more clearly in the 4th round): "The Australian education system should united and be the same level as the Nsw education system" (Grammar mistake)

Unfortunately, in the second round, Pro has agreed with me when I defined the topic as:


The Australian education should be the same throughout the entire nation

I (con) is arguing that the education should remain the same throughout the entire nation and pro is arguing that it should not be the same. Perhaps it would have been better for Pro to have made it more clear what the actual resolution was for his “pathetic and foolish” opponent?

Pro, can you make the resolution of this debate clearer? I’d advise you have a look at the way I set it out in R1. If you made it as clear as that, none of these misinterpretations would have ever happened.
I hope our voters will take into account Pro’s lack of efforts to even make his resolution clear AND the fact that he pointed it out in the second last round.

I would also ask of my opponent to try and keep a more civilised tongue when debating and not use words such as "truly terrible and pathetic at researching strong refrences" (another typo by pro!).

With pro’s actual arguments, and some research, I have only discovered that he actually LIED. Readers, beware of his arguments. He tells us that the information from the PISA is defective. LIE. Pro doesn’t realise that everybody does the same test so the results are perfectly valid.

I would recommend to pro to have a look at these sites [1] [2]. Pro has put forth an argument that he himself hasn’t understood properly. Truly, a lack of effort displayed.

Quoting Pro:

'Firstly the main reason why australia education system should be united to make all student equally learned'

Equally learned? Is pro mad? He directly contradicts this with his argument about the GAT and the fact that it's plain stupid. This is also a ridiculous suggestion that is IMPOSSIBLE to implement. It is not possible to restrict the education of those people who are excelling in their studies just to equalise with those of a lower standard.

Perhaps Pro should look at this idea in a much broader point of view. If every student in Australia was equally learned, who should become a McDonald’s cashier and who should become a neuro-surgeon when they grow up? Oh wait, I forgot! I am a pathetic opponent who has been “struggling in your education endavour”(Endeavour?). Pro seems to think of himself as superior to me, yet he even contradicts himself in a single argument!

Hunger for education and success via fierce determination and burning desire is the key to success and all challenges in life. We humans have the capacity to achieve marvellous things as long as we never quit, donot accept no or harsh words, have fierce determination, are willing to work hardwork and have a burning desire we can achieve the impossible.”

Pro here has given us a truly insightful quote for those who are studying in schools or universities. It shines us a light for those who have big goals in life. However, how is this related to the topic? I thought we were arguing on the education in Australia; you thought we were arguing about the education system in Australia, but now you provide us a quote that is not related to either one’s topics.

Con, one advice please donot come up with the arguements that students will struggle

(Spelling errors) Thank you pro for requesting it. I was running out of space, so we can let the readers keep in mind about that argument about students that will struggle within schools. That argument remains conceded.

'So are all the GAT students in Australia equally smart ? Yes and NoYes, Because if GAT students from NSW travel elsewhere theystillwill remain GATas theyStudy the hardest education system but No for all the rest of The Gat students'

Does Pro even know what “smart” means? [3]

Smart: Having or showing quick-witted intelligence.

One should note that Intelligence happens to be both heritable as well as environmental. To state that an education system actually alters a HERITABLE characteristic is simply outrageous. A similar logic is to say that education can alter your eye colour.

Where would find smart students in Australia? NSW, ACT or VIC
I vote for NSW as i donot know of students that are smarter or of equivalent intelligence of the students in James Ruse Agricultural High school
.”

This goes to show Pro’s clear lack of preparation for this debate. Is NSW truly the state with best-achieving students or not? Why should the entire nation imitate the education system of NSW if it isn’t the best?

Althoug NAPLAN is an "easy test" it is one of the most accurate testing systems that are used to assess the education of students within the entire nation. It is a very accurate way to make a comparison with the academic achievements of students within Australia.
Arguments:

Cost of uniting: Maybe it is time for pro to have a consideration of the cost of uniting the entire education SYSTEM in Australia as one. The amount of time and money it will take for all the teachers to be retrained to be able to teach as one is simply ridiculous.

As well as that, with all the teachers out at training for at least a year or so, the education within the schools no longer exists. The teachers are gone but students must continue learning. To clarify things before pro even bothers to suggest the idea of substitute teachers, there simply will not be enough to cover all the teachers within the entire nation.

Why adopt the NSW education system?: Pro did say that he wished to change the education system for the “good of the nation”. A simple question for Pro, why should we mimic the education system of NSW, when there are other systems far superior than those of NSW. Compare the education levels of a South Korean to an Australian [4]. Why didn’t Pro at least choose an education system that is better than all systems provided in Australia?

Conclusion:

The education system in Australia should remain the same. No changes in the education system within any states in Australia should be made. The education in all the states in Australia should progress at their own speed.

It is not necessary for all the states to unite to form one education system for “the better of the nation”.

References:

  1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
  2. http://www.pisa.oecd.org...
  3. https://www.google.com.au...
  4. http://www.guardian.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 4
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8

Pro

Welcome ladies and Gentleman to the last round of this debate

This round is for summary and to present our last argument

I apologies for all spelling mistakes i have made throughout the debate as I am used to debate via the use of speech rather than writing.

My resolution is as follows which i am changing or the last time
- Australia should have a national education system which would be equivalent to the current NSW education system

I have chosen The NSW education system because it is harder than all the other Australian education systems but not too hard as i would like the students to cope to a harder education in minimum possible time.

Cost of this policy has 2 sides - profit and loss
Profit
- As Australia has one education system then there would not be a point for one education system per state
- The people that lose their job will be trained to the new system and then will replace the old teachers

Loss
- Training for the new education system but that will be paid from the money of the education departments which are suspended

My case has boiled down to 3 main points
If the current education system stays
- Gifted and Talented Students from other states will suffer
- HSC students will suffer
- Students from all states except NSW students will suffer

I would like to finish my case with some rebuttals and a glimpse on Con's case
My opponent has started his debate with a contradicting resolution which supports both sides. I have proven that in round 4 and Con has not rebutted against that claim meaning he agrees.
Con's resolution - The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education.
Con's Argument has boiled down to 2 main points
koolkid

Con

Thank you pro for taking part in this debate.

Quoting:

My resolution is as follows which i am changing or the last time
- Australia should have a national education system which would be equivalent to the current NSW education system

With this, pro has admitted to changing the resolution for the topic of the debate (in the very last round!). He therefore implies that the resolution that I followed was correct the entire time and that HE was the one mistaken.

I have chosen The NSW education system because it is harder than all the other Australian education systems but not too hard as i would like the students to cope to a harder education in minimum possible time

Pro is putting for a VERY BIASED unsupported opinion. He thinks that that any education system other than the NSW’s education system is too hard. But, how can he conclude that the education system of NSW is not too hard for those with an “easier” education system?

Pro thinks that the education system of NSW isn’t too hard. Why wouldn’t the education system of South Korea not be too hard for the Australian system? [1] I think it is possible for the students of Australia to imitate the students of South Korea. If the Korean students are able to cope, there is nothing to say that we Australian students can’t follow. The only barrier that stops us is the TIME TO ADAPT.

Profit
- As Australia has one education system then there would not be a point for one education system per state
- The people that lose their job will be trained to the new system and then will replace the old teachers

Pro takes it for granted that it will be a good idea that all the education systems in Australia imitated that of NSW. He firstly stated that NSW has the “hardest” education system in Australia and later wasn’t sure. Now, in R5, he puts the statement forth as a fact that NSW the best education system. He has not provided any sources and therefore has no way to prove his statement. I have, in R2, questioned Pro about his claim as to whether NSW really does have the best education system. He has not successfully proven his claim.

Loss
- Training for the new education system but that will be paid from the money of the education departments which are suspended

I’d ask Pro to be more aware of the Australian news before he bothers to try to suggest such a ridiculous claim. I request that Pro have a look at some of my sources [2] [3] [4]. Australia does not have enough money to train thousands of teachers in Australia to change the entire education system to one! Citizens in Australia are losing their jobs because of our nation’s $40b overspent!

My case has boiled down to 3 main points
If the current education system stays
- Gifted and Talented Students from other states will suffer
- HSC students will suffer
- Students from all states except NSW students will suffer

Response:

  1. Pro’s claim about the GAT from other states suffering is a biased opinion with no logical reason. Pro doesn’t seem to grasp what GAT means. If someone is “Gifted”, as well as “Talented”, clearly they will easily cope with a new education system that is “harder” and will soon be GAT within that education system.
  2. HSC students will suffer”. Pro has only given a VERY brief overview of this claim in R2. He claims that the HSC scores will increase and decrease depending on the state they are travelling to. I find it unreasonable that any students preparing for the HSC will move across states when they should be at home preparing for the tests that will influence their future job opportunities! Once again, a biased opinion based on UNSOUND logic.
  3. His third point is more or less the same as his first. Both based on a biased opinion without any sound logic.

My opponent has started his debate with a contradicting resolution which supports both sides. I have proven that in round 4 and Con has not rebutted against that claim meaning he agrees.

I’m sorry Pro, but when I put forth my resolution as “The Australian education should remain the same”. I was saying that the education should not be changed.Thus, the same applies with “The Australian education should remain the same and have a variety of styles with education”. Pro doesn’t seem to grasp my idea. The education should not be changed, meaning there will still be a variety of education within the nation. This means the education system should not be the same as NSW.

Con's Argument has boiled down to 2 main points

My argument has boiled down to 2 main points? It is still following one resolution!

Conclusion:

The education within the whole of Australia should remain the same, meaning the education should not be changed.

Resources:

  1. http://www.guardian.co.uk...
  2. http://www.budget.gov.au...
  3. http://www.budget.gov.au...
  4. http://www.theaustralian.com.au...

My PoV (Point of View)

There is no better vote than CON because

  1. Con receives the point of S&G for obvious reasons
  2. Con receives the point for conduct because he kept a civilised tongue, did not forfeit any rounds and was clear with his resolution.
  3. Con receives the point for resources because Pro didn’t put forth any sources AT ALL.
  4. Convincing arguments? Most of Pro’s arguments were based on biased opinions and INCORRECT facts. Con, on the other hand, has provided arguments based on opinions that are supported by sources.
Debate Round No. 5
18 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Debatemeharharhar 5 years ago
Debatemeharharhar
erxarctleee. Dik_Dawg iz soopa semart, unlyk theees 2 debaiters. Pwetty darm rn't dey? Escpecially Pro. watanub. Pro is not pro at all. he da suky.
Posted by Dik_Dawg 5 years ago
Dik_Dawg
I would like to thank debatemeharhar for supporting me while I was unable to acess ddo. He/she, probs a guy, is absolutoly baestly and sooper smrat. Anywai wat is wrong wiht mai speling?
Posted by famer 5 years ago
famer
I can't vote, but I'll give my "would-be" RFD in the comments

Who did I agree with before the debate? Without any research, I'd said PRO
Who did I agree with after the debate? This is clearly goes to CON

Who had better conduct? CON

This is a clear point to CON because PRO failed to stick to his topic and make a clear resolution. Con, on the other hand, took his interpretation of the topic and stuck with that for the entire debate. Con, unlike pro did not provide outright insults to his opponent and also did not forfeit any rounds.

S&G Votes clearly goes to CON. No need to explain

Who made more convincing arguments? CON

This is the main problem: Pro supplied arguments that were based on unsupported opinions. Con actually provided sources for his arguments and therefore did a better job at it.

Who used the more reliable sources?

Umm... Pro did not provide any sources? There is nothing to compare. Perhaps I would be ever so kind to give this a TIE because there is nothing to compare it to? Otherwise, it'll go straight to CON again.

I'll probably have one of my friends make the vote for me.

Conclusion: 0-5 (Con receives 5 points and Pro receives nil)
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
Okay, this came down to a massive headache for judging.

The vast portion of this debate ends up boililng down to "What the fvck is the resolution?" which really isn't a debate that should be happening. Pro had a clear resolution when he made the debate, and went about changing it three times? throughout the entire debate. This is one of the reasons a) I dock him the conduct point and give it to con and b) look to con's interpretation of the resolution, which was consistent throughout the entire debate.

Con's arguments was that we should keep the educational system the same as it is currently, and it was Pro's BOP to prove that we a) ought to change the educational system, and b) ought to change it to the NSW system. Not much was done on the a point of the burden, but what it really ends up coming down to is if the NSW is what we should use, should we end up changing it. That's where con ends up winning, as he proves that there are better systems out there that are more successful than the NSW system. The refutations against this were scant and weak, at best, so this is where I gove con the win for disproving the Pro's BOP.

S/G goes to con, as pro had numerous spelling errors throughout the debate. I "donot" know why, though, they seemed pretty simple words.
Conduct goes to con was well, because a) Pro's lack of tact and flat out insulting comments in the debate, b) the resolution flip-flopping, and c) the FF'd round.
Sources doesn't really merit much in my mind. A source is a source is a source. Quantity of sources shouldn't mean anything, as anyone can pull up 20 links to warrant an argument, when all that's really needed is one or two. So I don't bother to vote on sources.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
Send me a pm with this link. I wanna vote on this but I'm on my phoneright now and giving an RFD on my phone is a bitch.
Posted by koolkid 5 years ago
koolkid
PLEASE VOTEeeee!!!! ^.^
Posted by Debatemeharharhar 5 years ago
Debatemeharharhar
Oh SNAP! Pro, you just got cut down!! NEWB ^.^
Posted by Debatemeharharhar 5 years ago
Debatemeharharhar
oh snap! I got ya there! You can't think of any comback. Noob (^.^)
Posted by Debatemeharharhar 5 years ago
Debatemeharharhar
Well, mr. 742841492349-75-123 or watever your username is. There are many things that I would like to say. First thing, no I am not scared that I will lose 100 - nil. Second thing, his username is Dik_Dawg, NOT Dik_Dwag (as you have said two times). Plus, look at your appaling effort in your spelling in the second round. Now who can't spell very well?

And, what are you trying to say about this genius Dik_Dawg? What's with this retirees, rolemodels and whatnot?
Posted by d1a6r7s1h9i9t8 5 years ago
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8
Debatemeharharhar u have no right to say anything u havenot even been in a debate
r u scared u will loss by 100 - nil
Dik_Dwag retirees are supposed to be smart and rolemodels to their children and maybe granchildren still you spelt will rather than well
So(both of u) stop commenting nonsense.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Deathbeforedishonour 5 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8koolkidTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This is a vote requested by Famer. His RFD is in the comments. Famer let Deathbeforedishonour decide on the vote based on References.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8koolkidTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: better formatting and conduct (FF) by con.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
d1a6r7s1h9i9t8koolkidTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments