The Instigator
9spaceking
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
dtaylor971
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

imabench should not have been banned

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 3 votes the winner is...
dtaylor971
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/2/2014 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 698 times Debate No: 51501
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

9spaceking

Pro

imabench should not have been banned. Sure, he/she's a massive troll, but nevertheless she/he is one of the greatest debaters on this site, with a gigantic 400 debates under his/her belt and winning over 80% of them. imabench has gained so much attention that people are parodying her/his name, one example being imarecliner.
Do you accept the challenge, con?
dtaylor971

Con

I accept.

Note the ban is only temporary, per airmax's words. I will start off my arguments since this is only a three round debate. My opponent may refute and argue whenever he wishes.

Just one simple compelling argument: If Airmax thinks it's right, then by God, it's right.




===The terms of service==


The terms of service, or TOS, of debate.org is something everybody must follow. This includes imabench. However, he has violated these terms of service rules multiple times, and thus deserves a ban. I state the DDO TOS:

"Any disregard for these rules or any of the other terms or guidelines may result in termination of a member's account." [1]

There are many examples of when imabench violated the TOS. I will use four main rules and show when imabench violated them.



I. "No use of profanities or swear words"


There were many times where imabench used profanities or swear words in the forum, poll, and debate sections. For example, in Mikal's "farewell imabench" thread, he used multiple swear words [2]. The quotes are below, but the swear words are censored by me.

Post #4 "[censored], who told ya?"

Post #10 "If you were in the PM you'd know why that is completely [censored] impossible."

Post #57 "Then how come mikal and two other members both immediately thought that I was basically[censored] when they first saw the new policy?"

These are all in the same thread. Notice these three posts took place in the first two pages. He did asterisk most of his swear words, but even clearly implying a swear word is still against the TOS. Thus, his breaking of this rule makes a ban justifiable.


II. "No personal attacks against other members or another member's opinions."


For imabench's breaking of this rule, we do not need to look any further than the weekly stupid. What this show does is picks ten "dumb" quotes and explains why they are so dumb, and then usually attacks the member. I love it, but it is against the TOS. For example, I extracted some of the things that imabench said in his latest episode [3].

At the 0:45 mark, he shows bubbatheclowns profile and says, "not him, but well, people don't like him" which is a personal attack on bubbatheclown, who is a member of DDO.

At the 3:02 mark, he says "I don't get how some people are so [censored] up in the head," which is an attack on another member's opinion, although it is debatable if it is correct.

Watch the episode yourself and you will see what I am talking about. If we look further than the weekly stupid, then we can see he insults people in their own debates. Once he went up with cooldudebro on Euthanasia, and they exchanged some questionable names in their debate, sparked by imabench calling cooldudebro's scenario "idiotic [4]" In fact, he even called con "G-od [censored] stupid" and told him "your IQ is about 12" and then finished it off with a nice "it is just something invented by an idiot (you."

Thus, he has broken two of the four rules I will present.


III. No use of racial, sexual, or religious slurs.


This one was hard to find. For racial and sexual, we have to dig back to his debates. In this one [5] he called pro a "retarded [censored] pirate," which while it may not be racial, it is definitely sexual (referring to the swear he used.) Aside from it being a slur, it is extremely impolite to pro to call him that name. Then he goes on to say [censored] please, which while likely not meant "in that way," it is still a HUGE racial slur.

Then, in his goodbye thread, he used a slur that is used to represent a gay on bubbatheclown [2]:

" if he wants to act like a dumb little [censored then let him..."

Imabench does not use too many slurs in a meaningful way, but he did multiple times, thus obviously breaking the terms of use/service. Now, we go on to the fourth rule that imabench has broken.


IV. No threats or implications thereof.


For this rule, we don't need to look any further than his ten last posts [2].

"So help me god, if you or anyone else says a THING about what I said in that PM I will personally come to your house kick your teeth in"

Kick your teeth in... does that sound like a threat? Yes, it does. Airmax's reasoning on banning imabench:


"It's a temp ban for using a racial/homophobic/ethnic slur (in this case a homophobic one)... he'll be unbanned on Sunday.. and using the term is a violation of the TOS.. and I banned him specifically for violating that rule."

In conclusion of my arguments, imabench violated four rules in the TOS (and many more as I will state later) which resulted in his ban. Thus, by breaking the TOS, he deserved a banning. I will add more rebuttals and arguments in the second round. I hand this debate over to pro and wish him luck.

[1] http://www.debate.org...

[2] http://www.debate.org...

[3] https://www.youtube.com...
[4] http://www.debate.org...
[
5] http://www.debate.org...

Debate Round No. 1
9spaceking

Pro


  1. The exodus--http://www.debate.org.... Because imabench has left, many other members left as well, and some are preparing to leave. (One notable member being myself, on the pre-exodus)

  2. His conrtibutions--he has made so many funny things, one being the infamous "weekly stupid"

  3. his popularity --sometimes it's technically a tie, and imabench still wins because he's so stinkin' popular


These are the main reasons why he should not have been banned. Good luck rebutting!

dtaylor971

Con

Got a bit caught up in baseball. I'll keep this very short because I just WANNA CRASH, BRO.

The DDO Exodus is much more advertised and exatterated that it acutally is. YYW pointed out that only four of the members left for reasons related to the site, while others didn't leave or had other reasons for leaving [1]. None of them mentioned "imabench" in their goodbye threads, which suggests that your argument is false. His "funny things" break the TOS, as I have already pointed out. The Weekly Stupid was one of my examples. His popularity has sparked unneeded battles (such as imabench and Caploxion, imabench and STALIN, imabench and cooldudebro, etc.) His popularity has a negative influence on this site. If the debate is technically a tie but imabench wins, this suggests that he promotes votebombing and makes other members become biased due to his popularity.

I also notice that my opponent has dropped my whole round 1 arguments. I await the rebuttals on that. If he drops that argument, he drops the debate, because the TOS states the rules that imabench broke and thus justified his ban. As for your round 1 arguments, "parodying" one's name can be considered a form of stalking or a fake account, which is also against the TOS. You also state that just because he's finished 400 debates and wins 80% of them, he shouldn't be banned? Why is that?

I await my opponent's arguments and will provide much more structured arguments and rebuttals next round.

[1] http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 2
9spaceking

Pro

"...he's finished 400 debates and wins 80% of them, he shouldn't be banned? Why is that?"
Because this shows he's a great debater. When it comes to debates, he rarely trolls, and he takes them very seriously.
I'm sorry. I was too over my head with this debate. That is my only point.
dtaylor971

Con

My opponent has dropped my round 1 arguments, which proved that imabench should've been banned (according to the TOS.) Thus, my BoP is fufilled and his/hers is not. Imabench's bio states:

"If you look at my Bio it mentions trolling 8 times and my debating skills only once, so that alone summarizes what kind of member I am. I do a lot of trollish debates meant for sh*ts and giggles and will happily do one that is sent to me as long as its less then 5 rounds."

Thus, he is a great troller, not a great debater. He does not take them seriously. Just check his profile [1].

[1] http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
No, banned for a week. He'll be back tomorrow :)
Posted by Cat_Lover 2 years ago
Cat_Lover
I thought he just left and didn't get banned.
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
Oh man I forgot to fix "exaggerate..." my finger hit the T button instead of the G button. Ah well XD
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
Will post in about eight hours.
Posted by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
We can be almost certain that Imabench is a man... he showed his face on every single Weekly Stupid episode. You can call him a "he".

And also, dtaylor, I'm surprised at your stance on the issue. I'm looking forward to reading your case.
Posted by Josh_b 2 years ago
Josh_b
imarelicliner? That was years ago. I bet you're going to tell us that Imaclock and imaimabench are recent additions too.
Posted by dtaylor971 2 years ago
dtaylor971
I'm also thinking about it...
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
I'm thinking about it.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
9spacekingdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Clear win. Several contentions were offered by Con, all of which weren't even rebutted by Pro. Pro shows a record, Con shows the TOS policy which is a vastly superior argument as the policy is mainly concerned with 'ban'. Pro's argument was just Imabench's record which has little relevance to the issue. Moreover, Con even added Imabench's posts to supplement his position. Pro did not even came close to the quality and depth, so con wins arguments.
Vote Placed by CheeseFries 2 years ago
CheeseFries
9spacekingdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro asserts that popularity and being a great debater makes you invincible from being banned. This is simply not true, so arguments go to Con. Pro also provided only one source, whereas Con provided five; these five were more additive to the debate and had better evidence to support Con's arguments.
Vote Placed by Romanii 2 years ago
Romanii
9spacekingdtaylor971Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Pro basically conceded... None of his arguments were more than a couple sentences long and he also dropped several of Con's points.