The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Zaradi
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

The Bilderberg will set you free!

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...
Zaradi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 417 times Debate No: 68562
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)

 

Max.Wallace

Con

Of course they will, if you are one of the 500,000,000, whose lives they wish to populate the planet.

You other 5.5 Billion are screwed.
Zaradi

Pro

I accept. Since Con didn't define any terms, it falls on me to do so.

you - The DDO user known as Zaradi (http://www.debate.org...), i.e. me.

Prefer my definition because a) It's the instigator's responsibility to interpret the resolution so that a clear debate may be had. Short of that it falls on the contender (i.e. me) to fulfill this responsibility, and b) the resolution is making a directed statement toward one party in particular. The only identifiable party would be the contender because if we were to say a voter or a viewer, it could be any number of thousands of people, which becomes an impossible burden for both sides to fulfill. One clear person (i.e. the contender) makes the resolution debatable.

As such, the argument I will present is that the Bilderberg will set me free. This is because I am one of the 500,000,000 people they have chosen to populate the earth. Therefore, they will set me free.

I turn the floor over to my opponent and wish him the best of luck!
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Con

Too funny, you replied so quickly, only an idiot would not recognize you are a sniper.

Well, what exactly is your connection to the Bilderberg?

C'mon, tell the truth. Like that will ever happen in this society.
Zaradi

Pro

My connection to the Bilderberg isn't something I can disclose. While I'm a public member and am free to disclose my affiliation, my colleagues who introduced me are not, and thus I must remain silent.

Extend out my definition of you as indicating the user known as Zaradi (i.e. me) as well as the reasons I stated to prefer my definition. This means that all I have to do is show that I'm one of the 500 million that the Bilderberg will set free. And I have. My opponent only asks how I'm connected, which is something I answered back for. Just like somoene can't explain their connections to the CIA or any other secret society, I can't really explain my connection to the Bilderberg. Surely you understand :)
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Con

Nope, I do not understand.

Your assumption is your view, as one of the 500,000,000.

As you claim, which of course is the truth?

If so, then how selfish does one life have to be to sacrifice 10 others, of equal feeling, but unequal blessing of the almighty Lucifart?
Zaradi

Pro

Extend out my definition of you being indicitive of the user known as Zaradi (i.e. me). Extend out the reasons I said to prefer my definition, neither of which were responded to. This means to win all I had to do was show that I'm one of the 500 million that the Bilderberg would set free. I did so, by saying that I was one of the 500 million they would set free. My opponent did not refute this. How "selfish" I am is irrelevant to the fact that the Bilderberg will set me free, thus affirming the resolution.

GGWP
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
The minority rules, just like WWII. That was until the people stood up.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
Thank you Lord Ragnar the Magnificent, You voted me a point!
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Max.WallaceZaradiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con, I don't even understand your arguments.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
Max.WallaceZaradiTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm awesome, apparently having a UN bank account and all that, so R1 is a concession by Max. Also great compliments from him as always, explaining to us how dedicated Zaradi is to have become a full "sniper" in the military; very few people even have the potential for such, and of them not all pass the rigorous training.
Vote Placed by bsh1 2 years ago
bsh1
Max.WallaceZaradiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Zaradi affirms the topic with a amusing definitional argument. Max drops Zaradi's points, so it's pretty clear offense for Pro.