Tyler dishonored his promise and didn't have a justifiable reason to do so.
Debate Rounds (4)
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening Argument
Round 3: Rebuttal
Round 4: Closing Statement
Resolution: Tyler did not keep his promise with me [awwww] and made a horrible excuse for doing so.
Background Information: Tyler is not partaking in this debate. We have me, the one who *allegedly* Tyler did not keep the promise to, and also a bystander who is con in this debate. The promise was that he would play any game that either I or the bystander wanted whenever we asked, even if he was on another video game (in particular, Destiny). This was especially emphasized with Destiny, whom Tyler had stated that he would get off immediately upon request.
Rules: By accepting this debate, you agree with everything stated in this post. The debate structure must be upheld. Definitions if needed will be given in your starting argument. Burden of proof is split. Do not accept this debate if you were not the bystander.
(We are repeating this debate, copy and pasting our previous posts. There was a glitch in the debate in which our round 2 arguments appeared in round 4 and instantly ended the debate.)
Tyler was playing Destiny with Con and I had gathered a group of people who wanted to play The Last of Us. We just needed Tyler to join us. I asked him to join which he refused to do. I reminded him of his promise, and he still refused. The excuse was that "He could only keep one promise at a time." The bystander had previously asked Tyler to play Destiny, so he used that as his reason, although the promise was that he would get off Destiny and play The Last of Us upon request immediately. Therefore, his excuse was horrible and Tyler did not keep his promise.
"First of all, I don't remember there being a group ready to play last of us but I wouldn't worry about that."
This is a clear violation of rules stated in round 1. The debate structure held rebuttals for round 3, which my opponent failed to do. Also, this statement has no bearing on whether or not the resolution remains true. I would argue that I had a group of people ready to play The Last of Us, but I honestly don't need to. There is no evidence for this claim for either side so it remains a "he said she said" statement.
"Tyler could only keep one promise at a time."
The promise emphasized that Tyler would indeed get off Destiny immediately upon request. Therefore, he was still breaking his promise which con eludes to by saying "could only keep on promise at a time."
"He later fulfilled erik's promise as Tyler said he would."
He later fulfilled part of his promise with me. The promise had no constraints on the number of times Tyler would do it, when it started, or how long.
"Tyler also did not specify the time of when said promise would be fulfilled."
Again, Tyler did not put any constraints on when the promise started, therefore it is assumed that it starts immediately.
Con failed to give any legitimate argument. He also failed to adhere to the debate structure which he accepted from Round 1. Con even admits his own defeat. He then argues that he is correct because anybody in real life would agree with him. This is subjective and also an unsubstantiated claim. You can't argue that your position is correct due to people agreeing with you (which is the Bandwagon Fallacy) nor because you just think that you are correct. That is not how a debate works. Please vote Pro!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Proving_a_Negative 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||5||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to pro since Con didn't follow the debate structure. Pro pointed out fallacies and supported his claims using the information provided in round 1. Con had grammar and spelling mistakes.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.