lol101 vs vi_spex: Who's the better debater?
Debate Rounds (5)
Round 1: Acceptance (If you post an argument, you lose your conduct point)
Rounds 2-5: Arguments and Rebuttals
lol101: Has a win ratio of 76.47% and has an elo ranking of 2,625. http://www.debate.org...
vi_spex: Has a win ratio of 6.64% and has an elo ranking of 1,089 http://www.debate.org...
My win ratio is MUCH higher than vi_spex's and my elo ranking is more than twice as much as vi_spex's. I await Con's argument.
is future or past true?
This debate is about who's better between you and I, not whether future or past is true or not. Even if that WAS an the topic, it's simply just a question, not an argument. If you have to ASK something rather than argue it, you are not a good debater. I suggest that this is also a reason that I am a better debater than you. I do not get off track when it comes to debating topics, and I especially have never done it TWICE like you did.
"only now is true"
"is future or past true?"
Now, please give me a better argument. Support it with reasoning and evidence please.
is now not true?
the argument is the evidence, like an equation you cant argue with
Argument- "a statement or series of statements for or against something"
Evidence- "something which shows that something else exists or is true"
I await a solid argument, and a concrete rebuttal.
i dont see an argument
I have come up with an argument by the 2nd round, and you have failed to refute it. This is an example of you spouting off nonsense. Here's an example of another debate you just spouted nonsense in. http://www.debate.org...
"i'm taking a stroll :]"
Which had nothing to do with the argument.
Which proves that I am the superior debater over vi_spex.
S&G: Pro. I have quoted vi_spex several times, so you have examples of his poor quality in grammar.
Sources: Pro. I have provided 5 sources, which are examples of evidence. Con hasn't provided evidence.
Conduct: Pro. Con refuses to follow my "evidence" rule and comes up with an argument during the 1st round, like I told him not to.
Arguments: Pro. vi_spex literally got off topic on Round 1, and didn't come with any sort of good reasoning that suggested that he was a better debater than I.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cotton_Candy 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: PRO provided reasons as to why lol101 is a better debater. Even though he didn't establish this objectively(ELO isn't an objective criteria) he showed that on a balance lol101 would be a better debater.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.