The Instigator
breakingamber
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
SilverishGoldNova
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Was Masterful's vote on the "Earth is Flat" Debate biased and should it be removed?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/8/2017 Category: Funny
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 460 times Debate No: 105664
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (26)
Votes (0)

 

breakingamber

Con

This argument is debating whether or not the vote cast by Masterful in the "Earth is Flat" debate is biased. I will be arguing Con, that is, "The vote was not biased and it should not be removed." Silverish, if you accept this debate, you will be arguing, "Yes, the vote was biased and it should be removed. This will be a one round debate.

This is the link to the debate:http://www.debate.org...

A vote is decided based on several factors: Which side had better arguments, which side had higher-quality sources, which side had superior spelling and grammar, and which side had better conduct.

According to Masterful, he voted Con for conduct because Pro decided to post links to Youtube videos and other sources. I feel this is a reasonable reason for giving Con the vote for conduct because this is akin to posting links to Wikipedia and telling the opponent to read them - Youtube is not a high-quality source and generally a debater posts reasoning along with the source.
Also, Masterful voted Con for arguments because "[Masterful] saw no refutation regarding travel capabilities or the stick shadow experiment. While I acknowledge that Pro did refute the stick and shadow experiment, Pro did not refute the travel capabilities from New York to Europe.
Going by the vote moderation policy guide, "if a voter employs clearly biased reasoning (e.g. "I voted for Con because I liked his argument more", "I voted for Pro because ______ is wrong", "I voted for Con because of I know that Pro is wrong", and "I voted for Pro because I don't like Con) as the reason for their awarding points, then that vote will be removed" (http://www.debate.org...). Masterful may have posted that he feels that the Flat Earth theory is stupid, he still posted reasoning for his votes that were not related to his personal feelings. Thus, I believe that Masterful was not biased with his vote and it should not be removed.
SilverishGoldNova

Pro

My position: His vote is biased, and should be removed.

My opponent and Masterful himself claim that me stating his vote is biased is just me trying to get it taken down. But I have clear evidence it is biased.

My Opening Arguments:

I will now explain why I believe Masterful's is biased.

He first off awards Con conduct points because I linked a previous set of arguments I had used, claiming that, by linking online evidence, I was trying to bypass the character limit. He has not shown that they were longer than the amount of characters allowed in that debate, and you cannot award conduct points based on the fact someone potentially linked an argument longer than the character space.

He then proceeded to claim my NASA admitting to faking images argument was invalid because there are other satelite companies, something Con NEVER said in my debate.

Afterwards, he lies about flights to Asia and the shadows and sticks experiment, claiming I had never addressed either of these. In reality, I had asked for my opponent to demonstrate why these would be impossible on a flat Earth model, and my opponent actually CONCEEDED on the shadows and sticks experiment.

We have masterful off debate claiming he thinks I'm "stupid", and that he is biased against "stupidity".

https://gyazo.com...
https://gyazo.com...

At this point, we have determined his vote was indeed biased.
--------
Addressing my opponents case:

"According to Masterful, he voted Con for conduct because Pro decided to post links to Youtube videos and other sources. I feel this is a reasonable reason for giving Con the vote for conduct because this is akin to posting links to Wikipedia and telling the opponent to read them - Youtube is not a high-quality source and generally a debater posts reasoning along with the source.
Also, Masterful voted Con for arguments because "[Masterful] saw no refutation regarding travel capabilities or the stick shadow experiment. While I acknowledge that Pro did refute the stick and shadow experiment, Pro did not refute the travel capabilities from New York to Europe."

You cannot award conduct points based on that. See, my opponent admits that Masterful was biased and lying in saying I didn't refute shadows and sticks.

Now it's New York to Europe? I thought it was California to Asia, which you failed to demonstrate why it was impossible on a flat Earth. You didn't prove it, so there was nothing to refute.

My opponent claims that if it is not personal bias, than it is not bias. We have him directly calling me and my position "stupid", and saying he was biased against stupidity.

I believe I have now succesfully proven that his vote was biased. However, fighting like children won't solve anything. I suggest we wait and see what the moderators do. If they take it down well don't be too suprised.
Debate Round No. 1
26 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Masterful 1 month ago
Masterful
I never admitted it was a bad vote. I said 'either way'

A$$ hole.
Posted by whiteflame 1 month ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2// Mod action: Removed<

6 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Masterful, which the con talks about accurately, explains how his vote from the debate he was talking about. Pro just doesn't see that con did better in that argument. Con by default.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain conduct or sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to explain why one side is winning based on their arguments, and not just assert that one side is better for unexplained reasons.
************************************************************************
Posted by SilverishGoldNova 1 month ago
SilverishGoldNova
BHSGFDFHNGRSGDGFFDHHGFDFHGdssdfds
Posted by breakingamber 1 month ago
breakingamber
NO ARGUING WH THE MODS

STOPSTOPSTOPSTPPSTOSTP

d
Posted by SilverishGoldNova 1 month ago
SilverishGoldNova
He still admits it was a bad vote
Posted by breakingamber 1 month ago
breakingamber
I think that settles it.

VTL SilverishGoldNova

Scum.
Posted by Masterful 1 month ago
Masterful
Either way my vote withstood the whiteflame test.
Posted by SilverishGoldNova 1 month ago
SilverishGoldNova
@Masterful Dude, even if your reason to award conduct is valid, your reason to award arguments points isn't. The point still stands you gloatingly misrepresented what I said to give arguments points.
Posted by dsjpk5 1 month ago
dsjpk5
You absolutely can award conduct points for someone trying to circumvent a debate's character limit. This is especially true if his/her opponent mentioned it in the text of the debate.
Posted by Masterful 1 month ago
Masterful
No silver, you're just bias towards your own debates and can't see the flaws in what you're doing. That's all.
No votes have been placed for this debate.