Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Minimum Wage Debate

TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:11:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Quick Question: Do pictures count as sources? I've been in 110 debates, and have only lost one economics. Good luck.

I have a feeling your mikal though
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:12:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.

If you read the criterion for the debate, I clearly stated the following:

"The criterion for this debate will be a preponderence of evidence as to whether an increase in the federal minimum wage will provide a net benefit or net loss to the welfare of society."

If you are arguing for a higher minimum wage, contextually, you are agreeing with me that an increase in the minimum wage would provide a net benefit to society. That, my friend, is conceding your end of the debate.

I ask that you either argue the Devil's Advocate so that we can maintain the original itnent of the resolution, or I will find another opponent.
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:13:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:11:38 PM, Csareo wrote:
Quick Question: Do pictures count as sources? I've been in 110 debates, and have only lost one economics. Good luck.

I have a feeling your mikal though

I'd ask that you source your pictures unless the picture includes a reference to where it came from.

No, I am not Mikal. I do not know who Mikal is.
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:13:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Csareo, that's actually a pretty clever tactic for that resolution.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:14:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:12:22 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.

If you read the criterion for the debate, I clearly stated the following:

I did

"The criterion for this debate will be a preponderence of evidence as to whether an increase in the federal minimum wage will provide a net benefit or net loss to the welfare of society."

Preponderence isn't a word, therefore, either is your criterion. I only argue the resolution you set, not the criterion below.

And the premise of welfare is ridiculous. I can argue both.

If you are arguing for a higher minimum wage, contextually, you are agreeing with me that an increase in the minimum wage would provide a net benefit to society. That, my friend, is conceding your end of the debate.

I ask that you either argue the Devil's Advocate so that we can maintain the original itnent of the resolution, or I will find another opponent.

Have fun. I believe you have BOP also. You need to be more clear in setting your resolutions though
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:18:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:14:56 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:12:22 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.

If you read the criterion for the debate, I clearly stated the following:

I did

"The criterion for this debate will be a preponderence of evidence as to whether an increase in the federal minimum wage will provide a net benefit or net loss to the welfare of society."

Preponderence isn't a word, therefore, either is your criterion. I only argue the resolution you set, not the criterion below.

I misspelled "preponderance." You cannot completely ignore my criterion merely because I misspelled a word that should be common knowledge. I clearly noted that Con must argue that increasing the minimum wage will provide a net loss to society.

And the premise of welfare is ridiculous. I can argue both.

You still need to argue for a net loss.

If you are arguing for a higher minimum wage, contextually, you are agreeing with me that an increase in the minimum wage would provide a net benefit to society. That, my friend, is conceding your end of the debate.

I ask that you either argue the Devil's Advocate so that we can maintain the original itnent of the resolution, or I will find another opponent.

Have fun. I believe you have BOP also. You need to be more clear in setting your resolutions though

I do not have the BOP. I was clear about this in my rules, which you accepted by accepting my debate.

Please do not try to change the goalposts after the debate has been accepted. If you PMed me or commented on the debate prior to accepting, we could have discussed these things. Now, it is a clear attempt on your part to obfuscate and change the goalposts for a free win. I will not allow it, and will not hesitate to report this if it becomes too much of a problem.

My resolution was as clear as it could have been. If you had a problem with it, you should have let me know ahead of time. At this moment, it stands.
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:19:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:13:31 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Csareo, that's actually a pretty clever tactic for that resolution.

Cheating is a clever tactic?

That's nice to know. I won't be debating you anytime soon.
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:22:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:18:48 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:14:56 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:12:22 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.

If you read the criterion for the debate, I clearly stated the following:

I did

"The criterion for this debate will be a preponderence of evidence as to whether an increase in the federal minimum wage will provide a net benefit or net loss to the welfare of society."

Preponderence isn't a word, therefore, either is your criterion. I only argue the resolution you set, not the criterion below.

I misspelled "preponderance." You cannot completely ignore my criterion merely because I misspelled a word that should be common knowledge. I clearly noted that Con must argue that increasing the minimum wage will provide a net loss to society.

I can. You did not specify, whether the one who supports increase in wage is increase in welfare as con. Future advice, do not make a resolution, and then tell me the debate has nothing to do with it.

I wont be bound by that

And the premise of welfare is ridiculous. I can argue both.

You still need to argue for a net loss.

Do I? Or do I just ignore your criterion?

If you are arguing for a higher minimum wage, contextually, you are agreeing with me that an increase in the minimum wage would provide a net benefit to society. That, my friend, is conceding your end of the debate.

I ask that you either argue the Devil's Advocate so that we can maintain the original itnent of the resolution, or I will find another opponent.

Have fun. I believe you have BOP also. You need to be more clear in setting your resolutions though

I do not have the BOP. I was clear about this in my rules, which you accepted by accepting my debate.

Please do not try to change the goalposts after the debate has been accepted. If you PMed me or commented on the debate prior to accepting, we could have discussed these things. Now, it is a clear attempt on your part to obfuscate and change the goalposts for a free win. I will not allow it, and will not hesitate to report this if it becomes too much of a problem.

My resolution was as clear as it could have been. If you had a problem with it, you should have let me know ahead of time. At this moment, it stands.

Your criterion and resolution are different. Your resolution is that the minimum wage should be 10.10. Your criterion is that an increase in wage is a increase in welfare.

This is silly. You didn't even specify who is what in your criterion. I don't know that your arguing that an increase in wage is a decrease in welfare.

Therefore, your criterion is broken. Your resolution is the only thing that can be debated. Also, as instigator, you entail the BOP
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:25:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:22:55 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:18:48 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:14:56 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:12:22 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:09:43 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:08:19 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:06:32 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:05:34 PM, TomStanton wrote:
Hello,

I began a debate on the minimum wage. If anyone would like to argue as Con, please let me know.

The debate can be found here: http://www.debate.org...

I accepted it. I'm upset that you used the slanted debate structure Mikal uses, but I will argue the minimum wage should be 10.86.

That wasn't the point of the debate. The point was for Con to argue that the minimum wage should be lower than $10.10. If your argument is that the minimum wage should be higher than $10.10, you concede that raising the minimum wage would increase the net welfare of society, and are thus conceding the debate.

You did not clarify that. Your resolution was that the minimum wage should be 10.10. You did not restrict me from arguing that it should be higher, did you?

And no, I did not concede anything. My only interaction thus far has been this post and accepting your debate.

If you read the criterion for the debate, I clearly stated the following:

I did

"The criterion for this debate will be a preponderence of evidence as to whether an increase in the federal minimum wage will provide a net benefit or net loss to the welfare of society."

Preponderence isn't a word, therefore, either is your criterion. I only argue the resolution you set, not the criterion below.

I misspelled "preponderance." You cannot completely ignore my criterion merely because I misspelled a word that should be common knowledge. I clearly noted that Con must argue that increasing the minimum wage will provide a net loss to society.

I can. You did not specify, whether the one who supports increase in wage is increase in welfare as con. Future advice, do not make a resolution, and then tell me the debate has nothing to do with it.

It is clear contextually that someone arguing that the minimum wage should be increased is arguing for a net benefit, which was stated, and the person arguing that it should not be increased, is arguing for a net loss.

This is tied directly to the resolution.

I wont be bound by that

And the premise of welfare is ridiculous. I can argue both.

You still need to argue for a net loss.

Do I? Or do I just ignore your criterion?

Ignoring my criterion is ignoring my rules and thus forfeiting the debate .

If you are arguing for a higher minimum wage, contextually, you are agreeing with me that an increase in the minimum wage would provide a net benefit to society. That, my friend, is conceding your end of the debate.

I ask that you either argue the Devil's Advocate so that we can maintain the original itnent of the resolution, or I will find another opponent.

Have fun. I believe you have BOP also. You need to be more clear in setting your resolutions though

I do not have the BOP. I was clear about this in my rules, which you accepted by accepting my debate.

Please do not try to change the goalposts after the debate has been accepted. If you PMed me or commented on the debate prior to accepting, we could have discussed these things. Now, it is a clear attempt on your part to obfuscate and change the goalposts for a free win. I will not allow it, and will not hesitate to report this if it becomes too much of a problem.

My resolution was as clear as it could have been. If you had a problem with it, you should have let me know ahead of time. At this moment, it stands.

Your criterion and resolution are different. Your resolution is that the minimum wage should be 10.10. Your criterion is that an increase in wage is a increase in welfare.

Yes, this is true, but the criterion is tied explicitly to the resolution.

This is silly. You didn't even specify who is what in your criterion. I don't know that your arguing that an increase in wage is a decrease in welfare.

Therefore, your criterion is broken. Your resolution is the only thing that can be debated. Also, as instigator, you entail the BOP

None of this is true. All you are doing is cheating.
TomStanton
Posts: 8
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:27:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is ridiculous. Csareo is clearly a cheater. I was clear in my rules, and instead of contacting me to ask a question as to what he thought I meant when he found it unclear, he is completely ignoring it and changing the resolution to what he would like it to be in an attempt to screw me over.

I am leaving the site. If this is the type of treatment that a new member is going to receive, and other members like ClassicRobert are going to condone it, this clearly is not the site for me
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:32:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:19:58 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:13:31 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Csareo, that's actually a pretty clever tactic for that resolution.

Cheating is a clever tactic?

That's nice to know. I won't be debating you anytime soon.

LOL

That is what is known as resolution-sniping, a tactic used by many more experienced debaters to get easy wins on debates.
I'm sorry that you have fallen subject to it. Please do not get discouraged; you seem like a good debater who'd be a valuable addition to the site.
Next time, set up a clear burden of proof for your opponent to avoid this type of cheapness.
Good luck!
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:34:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:19:58 PM, TomStanton wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:13:31 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
Csareo, that's actually a pretty clever tactic for that resolution.

Cheating is a clever tactic?

That's nice to know. I won't be debating you anytime soon.

I don't see how this is cheating, that's just exploiting a weakness in the resolution. When a resolution says, "The Federal Minimum Wage Should be Increased to $10.10," then that means that pro needs to argue that it should be increased to $10.10. However, that resolution can be negated by showing that the minimum wage should be raised to a higher point, that it should be reduced, that it should stay where it is, that it should go away, etc. If you wanted that sort of thing to actually count as cheating, then I recommend putting in a "no counterplan" rule as is done in many real life tournaments so con would have to defend the status quo.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
thett3
Posts: 14,336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:39:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:27:26 PM, TomStanton wrote:
This is ridiculous. Csareo is clearly a cheater. I was clear in my rules, and instead of contacting me to ask a question as to what he thought I meant when he found it unclear, he is completely ignoring it and changing the resolution to what he would like it to be in an attempt to screw me over.

I am leaving the site. If this is the type of treatment that a new member is going to receive, and other members like ClassicRobert are going to condone it, this clearly is not the site for me

Just run a theory argument about the intent of the resolution or something. I would buy that.

Like, current political debate over the minimum wage isn't about how much to raise it, it's about whether we should raise it at all. If you run that the resolution should be presumed to represent that debate, I might buy it.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:27:26 PM, TomStanton wrote:
This is ridiculous. Csareo is clearly a cheater. I was clear in my rules, and instead of contacting me to ask a question as to what he thought I meant when he found it unclear, he is completely ignoring it and changing the resolution to what he would like it to be in an attempt to screw me over.

I am leaving the site. If this is the type of treatment that a new member is going to receive, and other members like ClassicRobert are going to condone it, this clearly is not the site for me

Lol or flip flop and argue minimum wage bad, so raising it to $10.10 is less bad than $10.86
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:41:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Vital takeaway here: be careful when crafting your resolution, and keep in mind the weaknesses that can be exploited from it. Tom, please feel free to PM me and I'd be glad to give you some advice on how to deal with this sort of situation.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
thett3
Posts: 14,336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:46:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

But he joined an hour ago and got resolution-sniped on his first debate...
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:48:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

Honestly, I think it was Mikal.......

- He copy and pasted Mikals usual plan

- Like Mikal did before, the debate was tailored so only I could accept

- Like Mikal, there was a one day arguing interval

- He already had full knowledge of how to use the few places I talked to him in

- He argued like Mikal
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,336
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:48:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:46:53 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

But he joined an hour ago and got resolution-sniped on his first debate...

Yeah, but he claimed in the debate to set a criterion for the round which is LD jargon. I wouldn't be surprised if he had some formal experience
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:49:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:48:18 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

Honestly, I think it was Mikal.......

- He copy and pasted Mikals usual plan

- Like Mikal did before, the debate was tailored so only I could accept

- Like Mikal, there was a one day arguing interval

- He already had full knowledge of how to use the few places I talked to him in

- He argued like Mikal

Why would he create a new account and create an open challenge...
It's not like he specifically challenged it to you or anything
Csareo
Posts: 194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2014 9:51:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:49:57 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:48:18 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

Honestly, I think it was Mikal.......

- He copy and pasted Mikals usual plan

- Like Mikal did before, the debate was tailored so only I could accept

- Like Mikal, there was a one day arguing interval

- He already had full knowledge of how to use the few places I talked to him in

- He argued like Mikal

Why would he create a new account and create an open challenge...
It's not like he specifically challenged it to you or anything

He had it set to my age and my 1500 elo
http://www.edeb8.com...

Edeb8 unofficial champion of team debate bug finding

PM me for questions on campaign http://www.debate.org...
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2014 8:49:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/23/2014 9:51:01 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:49:57 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:48:18 PM, Csareo wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:45:08 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:41:56 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 5/23/2014 9:40:38 PM, thett3 wrote:

I think he said he's leaving the site because of this...

Well if he does he's being dumb, because it's perfectly acceptable to run a counterplan like that and not cheating at all, not to mention there being ways around it.

I'd love to see him go full libertarian and argue against the minimum wage haha

Honestly, I think it was Mikal.......

- He copy and pasted Mikals usual plan

- Like Mikal did before, the debate was tailored so only I could accept

- Like Mikal, there was a one day arguing interval

- He already had full knowledge of how to use the few places I talked to him in

- He argued like Mikal

Why would he create a new account and create an open challenge...
It's not like he specifically challenged it to you or anything

He had it set to my age and my 1500 elo

**Conspiracy theory**

GASP!

---

-.- Really?
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.