Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

RFD for junk food debate

tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 6:13:22 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
This is an RFD for the debate between famousdebater and fire-wings given here: http://www.debate.org...

Resolution and BOP

"Junk food should be banned in food"

"Junk food" is an unclear term, which is defined by Pro as being food that has, on balance, adverse effects caused by the presence of sugar and/or fat. Conventional definitions are assumed for the other terms. Pro's clarification of the BOP is particularly unclear: "the BOP is mainly on Pro, but Con has a slight burden." I'm unclear on what exactly this burden is. So this is how I interpret the burdens: I expect both sides to have positive offense for persuasion, but in the event of tied arguments, I presume Con.

Pro's case

Pro argues two things: (1) junk foods cause adverse effects to the health of children, which could be replaced by alternatives, and (2) junk foods impair concentration which is harmful in education. Con's response is essentially providing a weighing mechanism, saying his offense outweighs Pro's first argument. Con also (implicitly) responds in R2 that children can still eat junk food at home and that disallowing them from consuming some junk food in school will make them want to consume more junk food at home - this severely mitigates the first impact, because there's a lot of uncertainty that Pro doesn't clearly elucidate. Pro's second point is more compelling.

But Con essentially drops the second point, because the response is in the final round - arguments aren't permitted in the final round. Even though Pro brought up the point in R3, Con should have addressed it in R3 along with the other offense. Con's response that children can eat junk food at home doesn't impact this point severely.

Con's case

(1) Con argues a counterplan, to impose restrictions on junk foods without banning them outright. Con says Pro's plan limits overall pleasure faced by children, since consumption of sugar and fat causes pleasure, and that the counterplan reduces health harms while not compromising on overall happiness. (2) Con also argues that "sugar and fat aren't necessarily bad," which is irrelevant because the definition of junk food is food that is bad. Pro correctly points out that not everything fat qualifies as "junk food," but "junk food" is defined by fat and sugar making it unhealthy. (3) Con has a compelling turn: that unhealthy foods are beneficial in small quantities, which I view as functionally separate from the previous point in that this is about quantities, and that some of Pro's examples are acceptable in small quantities.

Pro's response to the framework issue is somewhat compelling. Pro essentially argues that school rules should be based on what facilitates education most, as opposed to pleasure/pain calculations. Con's observation regarding frameworks is wrong, because Pro does offer a framework. Pro says: "I accept that happiness is important in learning, but not the key. The key of [sic] learning is concentration." But I still find Con's utilitarianism framework more compelling, because Con actually has a source proving that happiness is necessary for a good education.

Conclusion

This was a bad debate. Both sides often fail to clearly explain their arguments and drop key offense from either side. Pro's first argument (health harms) isn't compelling at all, and there's huge uncertainty on the effectiveness of the plan. Con's narrative there is much more compelling, for multiple reasons outlined above. Pro doesn't adequately address Con's offense regarding happiness either, since Con proves that happiness is required in education. I am left to weigh the offense from both sides: concentration and happiness. On this ground, Con's arguments are more compelling because Con actually justifies a link between happiness and education with a source, while Pro just assumes concentration is more important without justification. This minor lack of explanation costs Pro the debate. Con wins arguments.

Conduct also goes to Con, because Pro shouldn't have posted his sources outside the debate without asking Con's permission. There's a reason character constraints exist. Of course, I still considered Pro's sources, but Con wins conduct because exceeding the character limit is poor conduct.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:40:05 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
It says "because of a accent.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:42:11 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.

Volver a Mexico.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:43:07 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:42:11 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.

Volver a Mexico.

I don't get about the conduct part. Just because I didn't say, "I am going to use sources and put them in the comments", meaning that it does not count? No. Almost everyone does this, like lannan, 16kadams, etc. So, this obviously isn't bad conduct, it is just what debaters do. It's the same for making your RFD in a forum topic or in the comments, it shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously it should. So, I don't think it is worth a conduct point.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:43:46 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:43:07 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:42:11 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.

Volver a Mexico.

I don't get about the conduct part. Just because I didn't say, "I am going to use sources and put them in the comments", meaning that it does not count? No. Almost everyone does this, like lannan, 16kadams, etc. So, this obviously isn't bad conduct, it is just what debaters do. It's the same for making your RFD in a forum topic or in the comments, it shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously it should. So, I don't think it is worth a conduct point.

Go back to Mexico.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:44:19 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:43:46 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:43:07 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:42:11 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.

Volver a Mexico.

I don't get about the conduct part. Just because I didn't say, "I am going to use sources and put them in the comments", meaning that it does not count? No. Almost everyone does this, like lannan, 16kadams, etc. So, this obviously isn't bad conduct, it is just what debaters do. It's the same for making your RFD in a forum topic or in the comments, it shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously it should. So, I don't think it is worth a conduct point.

Go back to Mexico.

that was not mexican. also, i never lived in mexico
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/3/2016 8:45:08 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:44:19 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:43:46 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:43:07 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:42:11 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Je ne re"ois pas de la partie de conduite. Tout simplement parce que je ne dis pas: "Je vais utiliser les sources et les mettre dans les commentaires", ce qui signifie qu'elle ne compte pas? Non Presque tout le monde le fait, comme Lannan, 16kadams, etc. Donc, cela est "videmment pas mauvaise conduite, il est tout ce que les d"batteurs font. Il en va de m"me pour faire votre RFD dans un sujet du forum ou dans les commentaires, il ne devrait pas "tre autoris". Mais, de toute "vidence il se doit. Donc, je ne pense pas que cela vaut la peine d'un point de conduite.

Volver a Mexico.

I don't get about the conduct part. Just because I didn't say, "I am going to use sources and put them in the comments", meaning that it does not count? No. Almost everyone does this, like lannan, 16kadams, etc. So, this obviously isn't bad conduct, it is just what debaters do. It's the same for making your RFD in a forum topic or in the comments, it shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously it should. So, I don't think it is worth a conduct point.

Go back to Mexico.

that was not mexican. also, i never lived in mexico

Lol, Mexican isn't a language. They speak Spanish.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
ColeTrain
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 1:50:50 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:45:08 PM, PetersSmith wrote:

Lol, leave the poor guy alone, you're too cruel xD
"The right to 360 noscope noobs shall not be infringed!!!" -- tajshar2k
"So, to start off, I've never committed suicide." -- Vaarka
"I eat glue." -- brontoraptor
"I mean, at this rate, I'd argue for a ham sandwich presidency." -- ResponsiblyIrresponsible
"Overthrow Assad, heil jihad." -- 16kadams when trolling in hangout
"Hillary Clinton is not my favorite person ... and her campaign is as inspiring as a bowl of cottage cheese." -- YYW
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 2:09:43 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 6:28:08 PM, famousdebater wrote:
Thank you for the vote Tej!

Sure thing. For the record, I think there was room for improvement from your side as well - you should have not made new arguments in the final round and should have pushed your point re: happiness vs concentration harder.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 2:11:00 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:43:07 PM, fire_wings wrote:
I don't get about the conduct part. Just because I didn't say, "I am going to use sources and put them in the comments", meaning that it does not count? No. Almost everyone does this, like lannan, 16kadams, etc. So, this obviously isn't bad conduct, it is just what debaters do. It's the same for making your RFD in a forum topic or in the comments, it shouldn't be allowed. But, obviously it should. So, I don't think it is worth a conduct point.

Just because "everyone does it" doesn't mean it's justified. There's a reason character limits exist: they are a rule. Unless there's an explicit R1 clarification which says "posting sources in an external link is allowed," you're violating the character limit. There is no argument worthy of DDO that requires more than 10k characters.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 2:21:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:

Also, your RFD example doesn't work, because there is no valid justification for having a character limit of 1k characters for RFD's. RFD's can legitimately be longer than 1k characters; debate arguments on DDO shouldn't be longer than 10k characters.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
famousdebater
Posts: 3,943
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 2:33:34 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 2:09:43 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/3/2016 6:28:08 PM, famousdebater wrote:
Thank you for the vote Tej!

Sure thing. For the record, I think there was room for improvement from your side as well - you should have not made new arguments in the final round and should have pushed your point re: happiness vs concentration harder.

I know. Upon re-analyzing the debate I realize that there were a few things that I could have improved upon / added.
"Life calls the tune, we dance."
John Galsworthy
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 5:47:28 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 2:21:25 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:

Also, your RFD example doesn't work, because there is no valid justification for having a character limit of 1k characters for RFD's. RFD's can legitimately be longer than 1k characters; debate arguments on DDO shouldn't be longer than 10k characters.

But, there is a limit. It is the same thing. Even their is a low limit, or a high limit, and limit is a limit, and thats how the way is.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 8:50:08 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
Remove the conduct point. Me and famous dicussed in the forums.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
famousdebater
Posts: 3,943
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 9:11:00 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 8:50:08 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Remove the conduct point. Me and famous dicussed in the forums.

Hold on sec. This seems a bit deceiving. I NEVER said that I agree that Tej should remove conduct. All I said was that you should talk about thi with Tej not me. I never agreed that Tej should remove conduct, merely that you should be discussing this with tej as opposed to myself.
"Life calls the tune, we dance."
John Galsworthy
fire_wings
Posts: 5,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 9:12:32 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 9:11:00 PM, famousdebater wrote:
At 5/4/2016 8:50:08 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Remove the conduct point. Me and famous dicussed in the forums.

Hold on sec. This seems a bit deceiving. I NEVER said that I agree that Tej should remove conduct. All I said was that you should talk about thi with Tej not me. I never agreed that Tej should remove conduct, merely that you should be discussing this with tej as opposed to myself.

I didn't say you agreed, I said, we dicussed.
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
famousdebater
Posts: 3,943
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/4/2016 9:46:41 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 9:12:32 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/4/2016 9:11:00 PM, famousdebater wrote:
At 5/4/2016 8:50:08 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Remove the conduct point. Me and famous dicussed in the forums.

Hold on sec. This seems a bit deceiving. I NEVER said that I agree that Tej should remove conduct. All I said was that you should talk about thi with Tej not me. I never agreed that Tej should remove conduct, merely that you should be discussing this with tej as opposed to myself.

I didn't say you agreed, I said, we dicussed.

You told Tej to remove his cote on the conduct point because we had discussed it. That strongly implies that I agreed - which I didn't.
"Life calls the tune, we dance."
John Galsworthy
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2016 2:40:52 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 5:47:28 PM, fire_wings wrote:
At 5/4/2016 2:21:25 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/3/2016 8:39:30 PM, fire_wings wrote:

Also, your RFD example doesn't work, because there is no valid justification for having a character limit of 1k characters for RFD's. RFD's can legitimately be longer than 1k characters; debate arguments on DDO shouldn't be longer than 10k characters.

But, there is a limit. It is the same thing. Even their is a low limit, or a high limit, and limit is a limit, and thats how the way is.

Wrong. The debate character limit is *sufficient.* The RFD character limit is not.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/5/2016 2:41:39 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/4/2016 8:50:08 PM, fire_wings wrote:
Remove the conduct point. Me and famous dicussed in the forums.

I'm not going to change my vote just because you want it. Report my vote if you think it violates standards - it doesn't.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass