The Instigator
trexfireoverlord
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

resolved: furbys cause insanity

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 4 votes the winner is...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 547 times Debate No: 71883
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

trexfireoverlord

Pro

CLEARY beyond a shadow of a doubt furbys cause insanity.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept.

PRO has the full burden of proof to show us that furby's cause insanity.


A furby is a "American electronic robotic toy released in 1998 by Tiger Electronics It resembles a hamster or owl-like creature and went through a period of being a "must-have" toy following its holiday season launch, with continual sales until 2000. Over 40 million Furbies were sold during the three years of its original production, with 1.8 million sold in 1998, and 14 million in 1999. Its speaking capabilities were translated into 24 languages.Furbies were the first successful attempt to produce and sell a domesticlcally-aimed robot. A newly purchased Furby starts out speaking entirely Furbish, the unique language that all Furbies use, but is programmed to start using English words and phrases in place of Furbish over time. This process is intended to resemble the process of learning English." [http://en.wikipedia.org...]
Debate Round No. 1
trexfireoverlord

Pro

they do they say furbish and make noses all day. that drives people insane.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO's burden of proof is to establish that furbies *cause* insanity. So far, all he has said is that the noises they may -- and he wrongly states that they make it "all day" -- "drive people insane." Effectively, he has done nothing more than restate the resolution. He provides no proof whatsoever. Further, to establish his side, he needs to prove not that a furby could cause one person to go insane, but that it causes people -- i.e., everyone -- to go insane. He further needs to establish causation. He has yet to even attempt that at this point.
Debate Round No. 2
trexfireoverlord

Pro

trexfireoverlord forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
trexfireoverlord

Pro

trexfireoverlord forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
trexfireoverlord

Pro

trexfireoverlord forfeited this round.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO has failed to uphold his BOP.

Therefore, vote CON.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by ResponsiblyIrresponsible 2 years ago
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Yeah, fair enough, lol, though technically he posted what could be construed as an argument..
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
Pretty safe to call any debate in which someone forfeits half the rounds a Full Forfeit.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
trexfireoverlordResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy read/vote. Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited multiple rounds which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Con. Pro failed to practice proper capitalization and punctuation in both rounds of submitted text. Con had no such errors, thus Con wins S&G. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to actually provide any evidence for the 'causes' he presented. Con was able to effectively call him out on this fact, and instead of presenting valid evidence, Pro then forfeited the remainder of the debate. With Pro failing to maintain his BOP, and Con being left to stand unchallenged for the remainder of the debate, Con wins arguments. Sources - Con. Pro failed to utilize sources within this debate whereas Con did (albeit a weak wiki one).
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
trexfireoverlordResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Sapphique 2 years ago
Sapphique
trexfireoverlordResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
trexfireoverlordResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.