The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Who should ultimately win this debate?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/8/2013 Category: Funny
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 546 times Debate No: 41932
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Hi. My name is DKishore and I am strongly for the proposition side of the debate: Who should ultimately win this debate? I should win this debate. I should win because I am better than Con. I have evidence to prove this. I have won the interstellar patty-cake competition. I have played with Cobe Bryant and beat him up. The final score was 150-2, towards me. I have also won the international thumb wrestling contest, against the TEDDY BEAR OF DOOOOOOOM. I have beat the speakers of the voters. I have won the senseless competition. It was really hard. I couldn't make sense. Finally, I am your BOSS.


My opponent says he should win due to his achievements but not only does ones personal achievements unrelated to debating have nothing to do with this particular debate but you also claim that you won the senesless compititon meaning what u say makes no sense and is therefore inaccurate. so ultimately I should win this debate
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by YoungTurtleBear 3 years ago
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: 1)No one had control 2)Con only had a couple spelling/grammar errors, and Pro had repetition, spelling errors, and capital error inflation. 3)No one provided reliable evidence 4)Con was able to prove that the evidence was not important. Also, Pro made ill-logical arguments about how he is better. Side note- Pro your honestly dumb for making such a dumb debate. I mean you could have at least out sense into your evidence. Instead, you went on blabbing on your stupid personal achievement. Even those don't make sense.