The Instigator
Bubbanater
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Hardcore.Pwnography
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

What do you think of the Call of Duty Series?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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 7 votes the winner is...
Hardcore.Pwnography
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/27/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,372 times Debate No: 28678
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (7)

 

Bubbanater

Pro

I do like the Call of Duty Series a lot. Now I mute people who are really especially the little kids that LOL . Not sure what Category so I put it in Technology.
Hardcore.Pwnography

Con

As Con, I assume that PRO wishes to argue for Call of Duty. As no arguments were presented in round 1, I assume the round is for acceptance.

In round 2, I expect PRO to put forth a formal resolution that can be argued.
Debate Round No. 1
Bubbanater

Pro

Call of Duty seems realistic. Does it seem pretty realistic to you.
Hardcore.Pwnography

Con

Pro fails to construct a case, or even a debate. As such, he does not fulfill his burden of proof, and by default, the win should go to CON.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by R0b1Billion 4 years ago
R0b1Billion
Quakelive FTW t(-_-t)
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by drafterman 4 years ago
drafterman
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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: WTF?
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro failed to offer an argument, where Con was happily ready to debate. Conduct and argument points are awarded to con for the troll debate that wasted Con's time. Also a 2 round debate isn't enough to really make arguments and properly respond to them, especially when you fail to utilize the first round...
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 4 years ago
bladerunner060
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made the assumption that Pro would be arguing FOR Call of Duty; Pro's position was only the question "Do you like it?", with the opening statment "I like it". Con's assumptions cannot be supported, and there was no real debate here from the beginning. Tie in all respects but spelling and grammar, S&G for what should be obvious reasons.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 4 years ago
Logical-Master
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO presented an "argument" in R2. The purpose of the contender is to contest the instigator's case, regardless of what the burden of proof is. CON fails to do this, hence votes go to PRO. Pursuant to CON's R1 assumption, PRO argued 'for' Call of Duty by advocating that it was realistic. PRO didn't address this argument. Note (1): If I am to believe CON and PRO has failed to construct a debate, there is no reason to vote at all as the purpose of voting is to determine who won debate (which CON claims doesn't exist). Note (2): I feel sources ought to been used this debate. Since they weren't, no one gets sources. Note (3): PRO's writing style should be discouraged. CON gets S&G. Note (4): No one gets conduct. It's bad conduct not to flesh out your case and it's also bad conduct not do your job and contest the other person's case.
Vote Placed by DoctorDeku 4 years ago
DoctorDeku
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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:61 
Reasons for voting decision: *Revised RFD* I vote for the Pro because he puts forward a premise for the debate to follow in the first round, that that he likes the call of duty series with implication that the round is about whether it is a good or bad series. Although this is a weak premise, it is still a premise which Con doesn't really respond to; in the second round Pro makes the claim that the series seems realistic and Con discounts this saying that Pro hasn't put forward an argument. That's why Pro gets conduct and arguments, because I find con's conduct in this regard to be cheap. sources are given to the pro for being topical and speaking on the given resolution, Con only gives analysis that claims Pro hasn't done anything.
Vote Placed by Luggs 4 years ago
Luggs
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't put a question mark at the end of his sentence in R2.
Vote Placed by emj32 4 years ago
emj32
BubbanaterHardcore.PwnographyTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pure noob-sniping at its finest