The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Getting a new device means a new FBI agent.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Zorsus has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2018 Category: Funny
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 483 times Debate No: 108316
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




The FBI constantly conduct espionage, so to the suprise of no-one, you are constantly watched by an FBI agent via your computer/phone camera. It's that simple. We are not discussing if this is true or not, we are discussing if you get a new FBI agent if you get a brand new device or not.

FYI, first debate ever.

Round 1: Acceptance

Round 2 to 4: Debate.


The FBI has absolutely no need to assign separate agents to every single device in the household, doing such a hilariously ineffective thing would mean a huge waste of resources. Simply assigning a single agent to monitor the online activity of the entire household would be more than sufficient. While installing RATS and other viruses on every device can also be useful, it only takes one agent to actually do the monitoring and installing.
Debate Round No. 1


(Unfair, you posted your arguement in the first round. Whatever.)
It would actually be equally effective as (assuming) the FBI agents would have to monitor many household items with cameras from different residencies. This is so that the FBI agents can work together on multiple households instead of one agent working alone on one household.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by A_Random_Douche 3 years ago
@Masterful. I agree with not discrediting that he posted his agruement on the first round. I just didn't like it as in my first round agruement, I was sure for it to say that round one was acceptance.

I personally didn't think I was being harsh when I stated that he posted his agruement in the first round, so I am very sorry if I had hurt you.
Posted by FanboyMctroll 3 years ago
And that is why I have no devices, I live off the grid, the only electronics I use is the library computer
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Like if you want to waste rounds and long the debate out, then whatever, but this mofo just wants to give his side of the argument, let us not discredit that, rather, let us be grateful for his enthusiasm.

Let us look past it considering you chose the debate subject.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
he's okay to post his argument in round one. You decided not to post your argument in round one which means people who accept the debate wouldn't have have an accurate idea of the sort of person they would be up against.
I can't see any reason for someone not posting in round one.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.