The Instigator
Yraelz
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

Under the below listed rules my opponent will lose this debate.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/24/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,987 times Debate No: 2899
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (39)
Votes (11)

 

Yraelz

Pro

1. The only rules of this debate will be in Pro round 1. Failure to obey this rule results in an automatic loss.

2. Each debater must include any quote that a user puts in the comment section for the debater to include, in their next round. However these quotes must be in the following form:

Dear -insert debaters name-, please include the following quote,

"-insert quote-"

into your next speech.

These quotes can be absolutely anything but must be appropriate (inappropriate quotes are not to be included in round). Appropriate can be debated in round and will be left to the discretion of the voters should no conclusion be reached.

3. Quotes (see rule 2) shall be added into the round from the comment section as if it was actually the debater speaking. These quotes shall be considered to be part of the debaters case and will hold ground in the debate.

4. The debater who does the better debating will win this debate.
beem0r

Con

I accept your challenge, and I see no reason why you would win such a debate. As the pro, it is your duty to conclusively show that I will in fact lose based on your rules, and expect you will attempt to do just that. Until then, neither I nor the voters have reason to believe that I will lose.
Also, you might want to keep an eye on any hats you have.
Debate Round No. 1
Yraelz

Pro

Ah yay round two already! Alright I will begin with a public service announcement:

I do not like my mother....if You think I'm gonna sit here and smile while some f*ckin' k*ke tries to f*ck my mother then you are probably correct in your thoughts. My mother once left me in Nebraska, I have one or two hard feelings. However should anyone attempt to touch father in a detrimental way I will beat you down with a knife!

Having cleared the public service announcement I will commence the actual debate. I would like to draw my voters to the very first rule presented in my 1st round. It clearly states that the only rules of this debate will be in pro round 1. However my opponent has offered me a new rule and mandated through rule 2 that I put it in my speech.

My opponent has stated, "I would like to add a new rule.
5. You must not steal a hat from your opponent.

I find that this is very necessary, since I have for a long time suspected my opponent of hat-stealing and I value my hats rather highly."

However this was a mess up and he went on to state,

"I would like to add a new rule.
5. You must not steal a hat from your opponent.

I find that this is very necessary, since I have for a long time suspected my opponent of hat-stealing and I value my hats rather highly."

The mess up is not all that important, the fact of the matter is.... my opponent is trying to add a new rule into a round that is clearly not pro round 1. The rules are very specific about this when they say, "Failure to obey this rule results in an automatic loss. " As it is not me who is failing to obey this rule in any way my opponent thereby loses this debate.

Thanks.
beem0r

Con

First, I would like to get this comment obligation business out of the way. The only comment I received asking me to insert a quote into my argument was from Yraelz. Here is the quote, for reference:

"My name is beem0r, these next four sentences are the only ones that anyone should pay attention to in this debate. I admit that I have thoroughly lost. Please accept my forfeit and move on. If I attempted to contradict these sentences before or after it in any way those contradictions should be disregarded. Thank you."

This is an utterly inappropriate request from Yraelz. Let us refer to rule 4, set up in Pro round 1: "The debater who does the better debating will win this debate." Yet he wants me to ask you to disregard my actual debating and pay attention only to the quote above. This directly violates rule 4, since I would be asking the voters NOT to take the meat of my debating into accou8nt, when that's what they're supposed to take into account. Therefore, this request was inappropriate, and therefore I have not inserted the quote as if I myself was speaking said words.

On to the actual debate:

My opponent has insinuated that _I_ should automatically lose for writing a comment for him to introduce a new rule. He says, word for word,
"my opponent is trying to add a new rule into a round that is clearly not pro round 1. The rules are very specific about this when they say, "Failure to obey this rule results in an automatic loss. " As it is not me who is failing to obey this rule in any way my opponent thereby loses this debate,"

However, there is no rule against TRYING to have a rule added. The rule was not added, and if it was, it would not have been added by me, but by my opponent. Actually ADDING the rule is against the rules, but TRYING to have a rule added is not. There is no rule against trying to make your opponent add a rule.

However, even though you did not explicitly state it, I will accept your round 2 logic as an argument for the inappropriateness of my request, and therefore I will not complain that you failed to include the quote as if you were the speaker.

Also, I'm sorry to hear about your mother, but you should probably get your anger issues checked out. Just a friendly suggestion.

I would like to point out that my opponent has yet to show any reason at all why I will lose under the stated rules. He has failed to substantiate his argument with any evidence whatsoever.

I await my opponent's final round, and with it, perhaps some evidence that I will in fact lose.
Debate Round No. 2
Yraelz

Pro

Dear Beem0r, So I herd u liek mudkipz? Is this true? If it is it should be instant grounds for your loss in todays debate. Until recently I had the opinion that: There are few things in the world greater than pie (note: not pi), and beem0r is one of them. But to tell you the truth, if you like mudkipz you must be shot..... Should this turn out to be the case the next time someone asks me about you on the street I will simply respond, "beem0r?? I don't even know her!" Which will add insult to your already grievous injury to my heart. Be wary my friend, when you hear the words, "beem0r: tonight, we dine in hell." you will be at the end of your rope.

In the meantime until you answer my question however I would like to ask you another one. Hypothetical situation. Say you were to press a red button which was the button to drop a nuclear warhead on 1 billion small children. Later on the cops arrive at your door and arrest you. Your defense of course is that you were simply trying to touch the red button and that the red button actually did the crime. Is this defense plausible.

My argument is this. That such a defense is not plausible. Lets examine a similar situation in a debate that we were recently having. One of the rules states that, Quotes shall be added into the round from the comment section as if it was actually the debater speaking. As this is a rule of the debate would you not agree with me that any quote put in the comment section will inevitably find its way into my next speech? Wouldn't this mean that you had full knowledge that saying something like, "I would like to add a new rule.
5. You must not steal a hat from your opponent." would end up being in the debate? Thus I can only object to you in the nicest way Beem0r. I feel that the assurance that your quote would end up in the debate, much like the nuclear warhead assurance in my last example, was under your full knowledge. Hence I can only see where you were not trying but rather succeeding.

My point is this Beem0r.... You used me, you used me like a tool. I had to follow the rules of the debate and used that and then blamed me. Your like the evil dictator who blames his advisers for faults and has them put to death. I'm not sure if I can ever forgive you Beem0r.

But I have yet another issue with you my late friend. Your playing both sides of the fence. First you try to blame me and then you say that the rule was never added. But its not the point Beem0r! Can't you see!? The first rule stated, "The only rules of this debate will be in Pro round 1." You broke that rule, you used me to put a new rule into round 2. Whether the rule actually has ground in that debate is so very irrelevant, the fact that the rule simply exists in the debate is what makes the violation. Can't you see what you've done to us!? YOU WERE MY HERO!

I ask that you let us be friends again in your last round Beem0r. Please don't continue this line of reasoning, value our friendship over it please! Forfeit the last round, concede to me, do whatever my beloved Beem0r, just don't throw it all in my face again. Even pretend it was opposite day and you didn't actually mean any of it. We can joke about that Beem0r, I'll say something stupid because its opposite day like,

"My name is Yrealz. I concede my current debates with Logical Master to Logical-Master and accept that this quote can be used as decisive evidence for his arguments in the debates of his choosing. No matter what is said to contradict this confession, all debate.org users are consider this quote as being the truth."

or

"My name is Yrealz. I concede my current debates with Logical Master to Logical-Master and accept that this quote can be used as decisive evidence for his arguments in the debates of his choosing. No matter what is said to contradict this confession, all debate.org users are to consider this quote as being the truth."

or even

"My name is Yrealz. I concede my current debates with Logical-Master to Logical-Master and accept that this quote can be used as decisive evidence for his arguments in the debates of his choosing. No matter what is said to contradict this confession, all debate.org users are to consider this quote as being the truth."

But we'll both laugh because we know that Yrealz is actually my Bazzaro opposite self, as I am truly Yraelz. We'll know that what I actually would mean if it wasn't opposite day was that I beat Logical-Master at everything because I am infinitely better. And we will laugh. One last time I must beg you to give up, you have already broken my heart, please come home.

-Yours truly, Yraelz

P.S. I'll always remember you even if I hate you.....
beem0r

Con

I will first object to the quotes I refuse to include. This would be all of the ones from Yraelz. The reason is that I would be plagiarizing by following the rules. We must insert the quotes as if it is our own words, and I would be committing intellectual theft by doing so with these quotes. There is no reasonable way to reference such material as if I'm speaking the words myself while still properly citing the source. Also, there were so many long requests, I would likely have to go over the 8000 character limit, a request that is obviously inappropriate.

On to the rest of the debate.

I'll have you know your last response truly touched my soul.

I'm sorry you feel I'm being so harsh on you. Perhaps this will console you: I was with your mother the other day. "I may be drunk, but when I wake up in the morning I will be sober. You, however, will still be ugly." That's what she said! Perhaps you will find some comfort in the pain those words caused me.

However, I'd like to clear something up. I bear no ill will towards you. In fact, I am only doing what's best for you, Yraelz. Perhaps one day you will see that. If I treat you with more care than I treat others, how will you grow stronger? It may seem tough now, but it's for the better that I be so harsh.

But maybe after this ordeal, we can get together and reminisce. For instance, I could sing you these very applicable lyrics from beauty and the beast:
"When I was a lad I ate four dozen eggs
Ev'ry morning to help me get large
And now that I'm grown I eat five dozen eggs
So I'm roughly the size of a barge!"
And you could laugh at me, as I've laughed at you in the past.

And maybe we could watch the old spiderman cartoon and sing the theme song together. You know,
"Spiderman Spiderman.

Does whatever a Spider can.

Spins a web, any size. Catches thieves, just like flies

Look out. Here comes the Spiderman.

Is he strong? Listen Bud. He's got radioactive blood.

Can he swing, from a thread? Take a look, overhead.

Hey there! There goes the Spiderman.

In the chill of night, at the scene of a crime. Like a streak of light, he arrives just in time.

Spiderman. Spiderman.

Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman.

Wealth and Fame, he's ignored. Action is his reward.

To him, life is a great big bang up, whenever there's a hang up, you'll find the Spiderman!!"

But my point is, we can move past this.

I'll address your red button analogy now. It is completely irrelevant, since the rules explicitly state that quotes will be inserted as if the debater spoke them himself. Consider the following. What if Logical-Master had posted that same request? Would HE have lost the debate automatically? No. The comments are not part of the debate, and any comment you or I make there is not considered part of the debate, unless we specify that it is (for instance, I've seen people continue their last round into the comments when they run past 8000 chars). But the fact is, the only thing I can be held responsible for as the contender is the actual contents of my arguments in the debate. Any comments I write are as a regular debate.org user, not as contender, unless I specify otherwise.

Also, you did not have to include the quoted text for a comment you had objections to. By including it, whether you knew it or not at the time, you indeed included a rule outside of pro round 1. You could have simply said, "beem0r left a comment that would have forced me to add a rule this round, and for this reason it is an inappropriate request." However, you didn't. You included the rule. You added a rule outside of pro round 1. This, according to the rules you set up, results in an automatic loss for you. As you said, even if the rule was not stated as an effective rule, it was still included in a round other than pro 1. This, unfortunately, violates the rules. And for that, you must accept your loss.

I will not forfeit the round as you ask of me. You've asked this for foolish, seemingly-selfish reasons. However, it is in your best interest to accept your own defeat, and grow from this experience. Hopefully, we can still be friends after this, as you have suggested. Perhaps our friendship is worth more than a win in a debate? Learn to look past the meaningless things in this world, Yraelz, and you will attain true wisdom.

As your mother told me, I may be drunk, but when I wake up in the morning I will be sober. You, however, will still be ugly. You as in your avatar, of course. And perhaps it won't be, since you could always change it. In fact, I urge you to do just that.

And with that, I take my leave. A vote for me is a vote for upholding the rules set up in pro round 1. A vote for Yraelz is a vote for, well, a position I would like to hear you defend.
Debate Round No. 3
39 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Krad 8 years ago
Krad
this was probaby the coolest debate ive ever seen
Posted by GaryBacon 8 years ago
GaryBacon
The last rounds for both Pro and Con had me hysterical. I did not vote.
Posted by beem0r 8 years ago
beem0r
How could I what, Yraelz?
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Beem0r..... the rules Beem0r..... how could you...
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear beem0r, please add the following quote,

"9/11 (more commonly referred to as 0.8182 or 1.2222 in Australia) is an abbreviation of the 9th of November, 2001, which is the date on which patriotism was invented. It is also Rudy Guiliani's birthday - GASP! Conspiracy!

On September 11, 2001, confused amateur pilots bloodthirsty Air Pirates crashed into the Twin Towers as part of a promotional stunt for the cancelled Space Ghost Coast to Coast motion picture using that spaceship from Independence Day. America rightly placed blame for the incident on Glorious Republic that is the country of Iranistan. This tragedy forced the United States into a war against terror, during which the problems resulting from horror were all but ignored. American security personnel concentrated their focus on Iranistanians and ignored the mass immigration of maple syrup-wielding creatures of the night from the North, and the grues from the Southnorth.

The well-known Hollywood movie director Oliver Stone later made a highly-successful movie about the Tragedy of the Twin Towers in order to, he said, quoting the Constitution of the United States, "cash-in on the problems of others." "It was decided," Stone said, "Spielberg gets D-Day and the Holocaust. Michael Bay gets Pearl Harbor and Lionel Richie. I get JFK and the Twin Towers." He continued, "I'm donating a portion of the profits to The Republic of Iranistan, so that they, with their primitive guns and bombs, may provide America with yet more delicious Hollywood film fodder." The film was the only one ever to win an Academy Award in every single category, including the new award for "Best Total Disregard For Anything Sacred That Might Be Left In American Culture." "

into your next speech.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear beem0r, please include the following quote,

"Montana is a fictional US state named for footballer Joe Montana, who purchased it from the Cleveland Indians for $1 in 1976. Prior to that, the state had been owned by the Great Northern and Northern Pacific Railroads, the Anaconda Copper Company, the Minnesota Twins, and the Minnesota Vikings. However, Great Northern and Northern Pacific didn't want to have to share it, so they merged to form Burlington Northern, now Burlington Northern Santa Fe, also known as "Bin Nothin' Since San Francisco". With a population of 19,000, and a population density of around 2 people/square mile, it will, fortunately or unfortunately, reach 20,000 people by the 5010 census. It should be noted that the population density of cattle in Montana is around 500/square mile and that for sheep, 234/square mile, meaning that Welsh and New Zealanders like it a lot. The capital of Montana is Hellhole. It is a home of MONGO.

In the early seventies (or maybe, the late sixties), entrepreneur Frank Zappa, later reincarnated as Donald Trump, had plans to establish a dental floss plantation in Eastern Montana and moving the entire state to the Southern United States for the cheap labor, but somehow was unable to pull it off; adequate wax supplies were not available since Montana has relatively few oil reserves, and the public was simply not ready for a dental floss product coated in wax made of cooper, wheat chaff, or cattle and sheep byproducts.
The Big Montana.
The Big Montana.
Montana is somewhere in here.
Montana is somewhere in here."

into your next speech.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear beem0r, please include the following quote,

"John Caldwell Calhoun (March 18, 1782 - March 31, 1850) was a leading United States Southern politician from South Carolina, famous for being a spokesman for slavery and nullification, and for being one of the creepiest-looking politicians ever. Quite appropriately for a man who looked like his father should have been a werewolf, he managed to orchestrate the Civil War from beyond the grave.

Calhoun began his career as a nationalist, favouring war with Britain in 1812; however, he later changed direction to attack nationalism in favour of letting the individual states do whatever the hell they liked, on the basis that those idiots in Washington shouldn't be able to tell states like Alabama what it could or couldn't do. Despite having died before it formed, Calhoun served as a major icon to those in the Confederate States of America, inspiring a new generation of creepy-looking Southern politicians. He was nicknamed the "cast-steel man", for his determination to defend the causes he was supporting at any given time. He was a proponent of the idea of nullification, which said that states could declare void any law they didn't much like the look of, and was also a supporter of slavery, calling it a positive good rather than a necessary evil. The fact that he owned quite a few of them was clearly not influential on his views in any way.

Calhoun spent pretty much all of his career in a variety of high-up government jobs. He spent seven years in the House of Representatives and then, in order to satisfy his inhuman lust for blood, became James Monroe's Secretary of War, and spent several years managing the Indian situation. He then served as Vice-President under John Q. Adams and Andrew Jackson, as Senator for South Carolina and as Secretary of State under John Tyler. "

into your next speech.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear Beem0r, please include the following quote,

"Fullmetal Alchemist (鋼の錬金術師, Hagane no Renkinjutsushi?, lit. "Alchemist of Steel"), commonly abbreviated as FMA or Hagaren, is a manga series created by Hiromu Arakawa and serialized in Enix's (now Square Enix) Monthly Shonen Gangan. It has also been adapted into an anime TV series and a movie sequel, as well as several spin-off novels and video games.

The manga is still running in Japan, and 18 volumes have been released so far. The anime, on the other hand, is finished, and consists of 51 episodes and a full-length movie sequel. Both incarnations (the manga and the anime) have seen high popularity in both Japan and North America. The series won the Animage Anime Grand Prix prize in 2003. In September 2005, the anime was voted #1 most popular anime of all time in Japan in a TV Asahi web poll,[1] and was #1 again in 2006.[2] In 2005, Anime Insider named it "Series of The Year."[citation needed]

It was nominated in six of the eight categories for which it was eligible at the American Anime Awards in February 2007, winning awards in five of them: Best Long Series, Best Actor (Vic Mignogna), Best Cast, Best DVD Package Design, and Best Anime Theme Song (Rewrite by Asian Kung-Fu Generation). It was also nominated in the category of Best Anime Feature for Fullmetal Alchemist the Movie: Conqueror of Shamballa. Awards were given in twelve categories, and no other anime won more than two.[3]"

into your next speech.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear beem0r, please include the following quote,

"Final Fantasy (ファイナルファンタジー, Fainaru Fantajī?) is a media franchise created by Hironobu Sakaguchi and owned by Square Enix that includes video games, motion pictures, and other merchandise. The series began in 1987 as an eponymous console role-playing game developed by Square, spawning a video game series that became the central focus of the franchise.[1][2] The franchise has since branched out into other genres and platforms, such as tactical RPGs,[3] portable games, MMORPGs, and games for mobile phones. As of March 2007, there are twenty-eight games in the franchise.[4] The series has spurred the release of three animated productions, two full-length CGI films, and several literary adaptations.

Most Final Fantasy installments are independent stories (the numbers after the title refers more to volumes than sequels); however, they feature common elements that define the franchise. The series has popularized many features that are now widely used in console RPGs, and it is well known for its visuals, music, and innovation.[5][6] Many titles in the series have been commercially and critically successful; it is the fourth-best-selling video game franchise,[1] with more than 80 million units sold as of December 2007.[7] In addition, the series was awarded a star on the Walk of Game in 2006.[8]"

into your next speech.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Dear beem0r, please include the following quote,

"Idiot is a word derived from the Greek , idios ("private," "one's own").[1] In Latin the word idiota ("ordinary person, layman") preceded the Late Latin meaning "uneducated or ignorant person."[2] Its modern meaning and form dates back to Middle English around the year 1300, from the Old French idiote ("uneducated or ignorant person"). The related word idiocy dates to 1487 and may have been analogously modeled on the words prophet[3] and prophecy.[4][5] The word has cognates in many other languages.

"Idiot" was originally created to refer to "layman, person lacking professional skill", "person so mentally deficient as to be incapable of ordinary reasoning".[6][7] Declining to take part in public life, such as democratic government of the polis (city state), such as the Athenian democracy, was considered dishonorable. "Idiots" were seen as having bad judgment in public and political matters. Over time, the term "idiot" shifted away from its original connotation of selfishness and came to refer to individuals with overall bad judgment–individuals who are "stupid". In modern English usage, the terms "idiot" and "idiocy" describe an extreme folly or stupidity, its symptoms (foolish or stupid utterance or deed). In psychology, it is a historical term for the state or condition now called profound mental retardation.[8]

Disability

In 19th and early 20th century medicine and psychology, an "idiot" was a person with a very severe mental retardation or a very low IQ level, as a sufferer of cretinism, defining idiots as people whose IQ were below 20 (with a standard deviation of 16);

In current medical classification, these people are now said to have profound mental retardation, and the word "idiot" is no longer used as a scientific term."

into your next speech.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by Yraelz 6 years ago
Yraelz
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by THEmanlyDEBATER3 8 years ago
THEmanlyDEBATER3
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Grandma 8 years ago
Grandma
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by Chuckles 8 years ago
Chuckles
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by RepublicanView333 8 years ago
RepublicanView333
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by dxpilot 8 years ago
dxpilot
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 8 years ago
SportsGuru
Yraelzbeem0rTied
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