The Instigator
1dustpelt
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zaradi
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Weirdman needs to change his voting habits.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Zaradi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/6/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,218 times Debate No: 21782
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

1dustpelt

Pro

My argument is that Weirdman has votebombed on many debates, (or at least had a bad RFD) and needs to change his voting habits.

On this debate, Weirdman's RFD is "m". http://www.debate.org...

On this one, his RFD is also "m" http://www.debate.org...;

On this debate, his RFD was "...." http://www.debate.org...

On this one, his RFD did not explain anything. http://www.debate.org...;

I can state more in the next round.
Zaradi

Con

Generally, I am never against advocating for a bad voter's habits to be changed. But with only four samples provided by my opponent, one not even being a legitimate votebomb, I had to wonder to myself: "Is this really who he is?"

As it turns out, it wasn't indeed. After a few pages of his votes and a sad sigh of disapointment, I find our good instigator a bit confused. If we would be changing his voting habits, we would also have to change all of these LEGITIMATE votes as well:

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

I will provide more sources next round, but I figure that this would be sufficient to prove my point.

Next, let's look specifically at the second link that my opponent provides. While I don't contest the first, third, and fourth link, the second link ought not be considered a votebomb. He gave three points to each side, effectively doing nothing for the round. It would work out the same way as giving both sides zero points. It can't be a votebomb if the vote didn't bomb any result in the debate. So that link doesn't prove his side in any way.

Again, if we have to change his voting habits, all of his votes would have to change, which means that we would have to change all of his legit votes as well as all of his non-legit votes. And since he has more legit votes than non-legit votes, there are better places we should focus our attention on.

Debate Round No. 1
1dustpelt

Pro

Thank you for accepting.

Rebuttals

"As it turns out, it wasn't indeed. After a few pages of his votes and a sad sigh of disapointment, I find our good instigator a bit confused. If we would be changing his voting habits, we would also have to change all of these LEGITIMATE votes as well"
He does not have to change all of his votes in order to change his voting habits. According to the definition of "change", just changing a few votes is changing his voting habits. Not votebombing from now on is changing his voting habits.

"Next, let's look specifically at the second link that my opponent provides. While I don't contest the first, third, and fourth link, the second link ought not be considered a votebomb. He gave three points to each side, effectively doing nothing for the round. It would work out the same way as giving both sides zero points. It can't be a votebomb if the vote didn't bomb any result in the debate. So that link doesn't prove his side in any way."
I agree that it is not a "votebomb", but look at his RFD. He should change his voting habits so that he uses better RFD's.

"Again, if we have to change his voting habits, all of his votes would have to change, which means that we would have to change all of his legit votes as well as all of his non-legit votes. And since he has more legit votes than non-legit votes, there are better places we should focus our attention on."
Again, he does not have to change all of his votes in order to change his voting habits. According to the definition of "change", just changing a few votes is changing his voting habits. Not votebombing from now on is changing his voting habits.

Conclusion
By not votebombing and using better RFD's, Weirdman is changing his voting habits.

Sources:
http://dictionary.reference.com...;


Zaradi

Con

Unfortunately for my opponent, he is deviating from the wording of the resolution. Let's remind the audience of it:

Weirdman needs to change his voting habits.

We learned the definition of change last round. Now let's learn the definiton of habit this round. Habit is defined by Merriam-Webster's Online Dicitionary as the prevailing disposition or character of a person's thoughts and feelings[1]. This impacts the round because if we are specifically changing his voting habit, as stated by the resolution, we would be doing more than changing his habit of votebombing. We would also be changing how he voted in normal debates where he DOESN'T votebomb, thus causing more harm than prevented.

Also, we have to consider all of his votes because the resolution doesn't say "Wierdman needs to change his voteBOMBING habits", it says "Weirdman needs to change his voting habits". Thus, we have to consider all of the votes he casts as subject to being changed when evaluating the round, not just the debates he votebombed.

As stated above in the previous round, he has legitimate votes more often than he does votebombs, so changing his voting habit would cause more problems than it would fix. For this reason, I urge a con vote for the resolution.

Over to you, Pro.

Source:
[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...;
Debate Round No. 2
1dustpelt

Pro

All right, I concede. Vote Con!
Zaradi

Con

xD And to think I was that close to conceding before I came up with the habit argument.
Oh well. This was a fun debate :D
Debate Round No. 3
Zaradi

Con

For the lulz
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Debate Round No. 4
Zaradi

Con



I will see your Nyan kittehs and raise you a herd of alpacas marching to the tune of The Empire Strikes Back from Star Wars.
For the lulz.

Remember, vote con!
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
1 to 0 is the same as 4 to 0. :)
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
This may have turned out to be the best debate ever. Just sayin'
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
1dustpeltZaradiTied
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: Concession
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
1dustpeltZaradiTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF