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

If you win a loser contest does that make you a winner.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Anonymous has forfeited round #5.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/24/2018 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 493 times Debate No: 111439
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

Con

No, because you are in a loser contest for a reason.
MagicAintReal

Pro

I accept, Con.
I noticed there were no definitions supplied.
So, let me be the supplier.

Definitions

if - on the condition or supposition that.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

you - used to refer to any person in general.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

win - be successful or victorious in a contest.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

loser - a person who fails frequently or is generally unsuccessful in life.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

contest - an event in which people compete for supremacy in an activity or quality.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

make - constitute; amount to.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

winner - a person who wins something.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

loser contest - an event in which people compete for supremacy in the quality of being a person who fails frequently or is generally unsuccessful in life.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...


Full Resolution

If you win a loser contest, does that make you a winner?

In this resolution, the noun "loser" is being used to modify the object "contest," whereby "loser contest" becomes one singular term of the debate, instead of two separate terms.


*Winning a Loser Contest*

By competing for supremacy in the quality of being a loser and arising victorious, one wins the loser contest.
When one wins the loser contest, one satisfies the definition of a person who wins something.
What did they win?
Supremacy in a contest where people compete for a particular quality.

Though antithetical it may sound, one can be a winner and a supreme loser simultaneously; "winner" and "loser" are not mutually exclusive terms.

If you win, you're a winner.
Debate Round No. 1

Con

No because you are loser. Losers have no right to win. Even if they do they would be in a loser contest for a reason. If it was a different contest that would be different.
MagicAintReal

Pro

Thanks for that Con.
Wow, it took me all day to read Con's last round.
Such breadth...such depth could not be contained by 10,000 characters.
Simply breathtaking...in that it only takes one breath to read Con's last round aloud.

*Review*

The uncontested-therefore-accepted definitions provided 1st round clearly demonstrate that a winner is someone who is victorious in a contest and this contest could easily be a competition for supremacy in the quality of being a loser.
When one is victorious, one is a winner, even if one is a major loser.


*Responding to Con*

Con reasons:
"No because you are loser."

My response:
No need for name calling, jeez.
While it may be true that I'm a person who fails frequently, I'm still able to win in a competition to be the supreme frequently failing person.


Con asserts:
"Losers have no right to win."

My response:
Ah the lesser-known 28th amendment, the right to win.
"The right of the people who fail less than frequently to win and be victorious shall not be infringed."

Sarcasm aside, winning is not a right and being a loser does not preclude one from also being a winner, especially in a contest to be the supreme loser.


Con continues:
"Even if they do they would be in a loser contest for a reason."

My response:
Yeah, the reason would be to win the contest, becoming a winner.


Con imagines:
"If it was a different contest that would be different."

My response:
I tend to dismiss tautologies, but what the heck, I've got 10,000 characters.
Why would a different contest's winner be any more victorious than a loser contest's winner?


*Conclusion*

I extend all dropped arguments.
Winners of any competition, including loser contests, are winners.
Debate Round No. 2

Con

My Foe said that I was name calling. I was expressing the fact that you are loser. I never said any ones name or said it directly to anyone so that is false. Also, they were being very rude about saying it took them all day to read it. My point was very clear in one sentence. There are 5 rounds and I believe that as long as you get your point across there shouldn't be a character limit and judging by it. Just because you copy and paste almost everything you put down on your debate arguments doesn't mean you can do this. Now anyways, losers are not winners in the contest because they are a loser for a reason and why would anybody be in a loser contest if all they do is "win win win no matter what?"
MagicAintReal

Pro

Thanks for that Con.
Con spent a majority of last round discussing my rudeness.
Ironically, Con used this to attempt to insult my debate prowess.
Uh oh.

*Responding to Con*

Con complains:
"My Foe said that I was name calling. I was expressing the fact that you are loser."

My response:
I was actually joking, but whatevs.
The definitions are clear about "you" meaning "any person in general," so I had interpreted "No because you are a loser" to in fact mean the general you, I was making a joke about how you phrased it, but now having explained it all, it's fading...still originally very funny though.


Con continues:
"I never said any ones name or said it directly to anyone so that is false."

My response:
Ok, it was a joke, chill.


Con gets judgy:
"Also, they were being very rude about saying it took them all day to read it."

My response:
Oh come on, that was funny.
There's nothing wrong with me being ironic when you posted an extremely short post in a crucial round you specifically intended to utilize 10,000 characters as opposed to any other smaller character amount.
It's just funny.


Con defends:
"My point was very clear in one sentence."

My response:
So clear, that you're going to re-post it this round?
Your point "they're a loser for a reason" is irrelevant to whether or not they win something.
The reason could be that one frequently fails, thus they are a loser, but they manage to become a person who wins some contest.


Con reminds:
"There are 5 rounds and I believe that as long as you get your point across there shouldn't be a character limit and judging by it."

My response:
Ok, now that you've cleared up your lack of a response last round, you're gonna really bring it this round, right?


Con insults:
"Just because you copy and paste almost everything you put down on your debate arguments doesn't mean you can do this."

My response:
The only things I copy and paste are direct quotes.
I'm either quoting Con or quoting a citation.


Con repeats:
"Losers are not winners in the contest because they are a loser for a reason."

My response:
Ugh.
A person who fails frequently can enter a competition for supreme loser and arise victorious.
They might be a loser, but they are a contest winner.

Con continues:
"and why would anybody be in a loser contest if all they do is "win win win no matter what?"

My response:
They would be in the loser contest to win supremacy with respects to being a loser.
Nothing about the definition of "winner" says anything about "winning all the time no matter what."
One who wins a competition is a winner, losers included.


*Conclusion*

Con's just not really responding to anything I've posited thus far.
These crucial, resolution-affirming arguments have also served to refute Con's assertions.
As such, those affirming arguments stand.

Con?
Debate Round No. 3

Con

you win. i don't really want to debate against someone like this so... good job you win. everyone vote once this is over that they won.
MagicAintReal

Pro

Thanks for that concession Con.
Thanks for the debate.


Con concedes:
"you win. i don't really want to debate against someone like this so... good job you win. everyone vote once this is over that [Pro] won."


*Conclusion*

I affirm because Con concedes.

Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
DeletedUser
like a gaming contest
This debate has 0 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.