The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
11 Points

School Uniforms Shouldn't Be Required

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/19/2014 Category: People
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,901 times Debate No: 56743
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (42)
Votes (2)




Sigh...I've already won this six times. Nevertheless, everyone forfeited at least one round of my 5 serious debates, and Ajab seems to have never forfeited, so I trust that he'll become the first debater to not forfeit one of my serious School Uniform Debates.
I define "required" as "forced, mandatory".

You may start on round one.

In the adult world students have to make their own choices and school uniforms exclude that "training excercise" of having to choose what clothes to wear. [1]

School uniforms send out a sense of anti-individuality that goes against our personal liberty and freedom of expression. A nation should not go against its beliefs. It would not really matter if this was not in the constitution in the first place, but seriously--the constitution is the basic belief of America, and breaking it is a big blunder! [2]

Although school uniforms can bring a sense of unity among students, the unity is too robot-like! As shown in source [3], a parent openly states "I believe we should...advance independent, creative thinkers -- not standardized, uniformed thinkers." Frudden said. "To do anything less is to do our children and our society a disservice."

In addition, school uniforms are simply a band-aid on school violence. In fact, in a study published in The Journal of Educational Research, the authors concluded that requiring students to wear uniforms has no direct effect on substance abuse, behavioral problems, or school attendance. Further tests proved the students they studied who were required to wear uniforms actually scored lower on standardized achievement tests than did a comparable group not required to wear them(Brunsma, Rockquemore). [4]
This only supports the fact that because uniforms do not allow creativity through expression of clothes, and Albert Einstein once said "Creativity is intelligence having fun", this study highlights Einstein's fact and proves both of my argumemts to be correct. In other words, not only do school uniforms have negative impacts as demonstrated, this study also strengthens my argument about the uniform restricting students' creativity. (Einstein's quote is in source [5])

As shown from source [1], parents are unsatisfied with the school uniform prices, indicating that school uniforms don't exactly save parents money. They would not complain if the school uniforms actually saved money! This shows school unforms are a financial burden for poor families, and morever, are an unfair additional expense for parents who pay taxes for a free public education. To demonstrate this, on average clothing costs $72.00 per month. [6] In contrast, school uniforms can go all the way up to $156 for boys, $140 for girls, approximately twice as much as money spent in a month. [7] And if the school uniform gets too small or ripped...well, the cost is doubled! This just shows how unfair the cost of school uniforms is.

People usually judge other people based on the clothes they wear, I agree, but a person's clothes really have nothing to do what goes on. If someone isn't very smart or physically capable they will still get bullied regardless of the fact that they look the same as everyone else. In other words, bullies can still persist, teasing other students concerning their mental ability instead of physical. Kids might be more likely to be made fun of if they are overachievers. Likewise, kids who struggle academically, or kids with mental disorders, might become easier targets for bullies. [8] Furthermore, not everyone bases people on their clothing. Sure, nobody's like the Beauty from "Beauty and the Beast", but everyone can see some desirable traits underneath the ugly face! (No offense, Mr. Beast)
There are even more ways for bullies to get to other students if they wear uniform. One example is if a child doesn't feel comfortable in his uniform, his silent cues makes him more likely to be victimized by students who would prey on his insecurities. [8] This actually makes sense, as some students do not dare stand up against these school rules and their poor ability to fight back is practically a lure for bullies!
In fact, even those who stand up can be annoying. Without school uniforms, obviously nobody would complain about their lack of freedom. However, in source [9], even though the author completely dismisses the victim and says "Mike DePinto is wasting time", this only shows the further complications that school uniforms bring. If school uniforms weren't required in the first place, Mika DePinto would have been happy and not have rebelled. Another example is presented way back in source [3]. Again, if school uniforms weren't required, there would be no need for the arguing over the emblems and all these complex problems would be solved.

Onto you, con!

[1]Brosnan, Peter, and Alexis Brindley. "What Not to Wear: A School's Dress Code Limits Clothing Styles and Colors." Current Events, a Weekly Reader Publication 28 Mar. 2011: 7. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014."

[2]Fetzer, Kent J. "School Uniforms Stifle Freedom of Expression." Salt Lake Tribune [Detroit] 18 Apr. 2002: F2. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014."

[3]Dolan, Maura. "CALIFORNIA; Court Rejects School's Shirts; Judges Say Requiring Students to Wear the School's Motto Is a Free-Speech Violation." Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles] 15 Feb. 2014: AA3. Elibrary. Web. 21 Feb. 2014."



I thank 9spaceking for iniating this debate. I apologize for cutting it so closely.
I should remind 9spaceking that the Burden of Proof is on him, as he is the Proposition and the person affirming the motion. As the Latin law goes: "Onus probandi incumbet ei qui diceit non ei qui negat".

I shall therefore spend my time rebutting 9spaceking's arguments.

1. The first argument that 9spaceking gives is that school uniforms have a negative affect on the future of a child because later on, as adults, people have to make choices about clothing. I should strongly disagree, unless you end up homeless, which goes against the purpose of a school, you should have a job. Most jobs have fixed clothing requirements which are formal and often represent the kind of clothes you wear to school. If you ever look at bankers, teachers, and many officials they were, almost, the same type of clothes. The Uniform prepares them for this, it instills in them the thought that although they have freedom, all about their life they will have to conform to certain dresses.

2. I should mention that 9spaceking thinks from a very American perspective, while this may not be wrong, one has to understand that no where was our motion limited to America. Most of his arguments fall then and there. I should also mention now that his second argument is that it suppresses individuality. As the below article will show this is not true. Even with uniforms students find a way to become individuals. They can wear different accessories and hairstyles, also how very objectivistic of my opponent to state that only them. School Uniforms do nothing against personality which is the key to becoming individuals, these personalities are important.

3. If my opponent is going to state that Uniforms have a negative effect on the psychology of the youth then he must present evidence from different psychological journals or show this from logic, so long as he cannot do this, his argument does not stand. In truth uniforms do not make students robot like, I believe we are over exaggerating this. If we examine numerous people in school then we can easily deduce that they still have their personalities, with better attendance if I may add. It is no exaggeration that every year 160,000 students miss school because they either do not have good clothes to wear or are afraid of being bullied for what they wear. This may sound rather casual but when was the last time one of us went to a uniform enforced school and did not see children laughing, I go to such a school and I testify that what my opponent says is ridiculous. My opponent has already admitted that it does bring unity which is a major role, he contradicts this with his next argument.

4. Your link leads to nothing. Other than that the above sources show how students who wear uniform have much better attendance, this should lead directly to better grades as more schooling time means more learning time. Unless of course my opponent is insinuating that school uniforms harm the memory, something for which he has provided no evidence. His second part of this argument is an appeal to authority, this aside let us not forget that Einstein himself had to wear school uniforms. Lastly even in his old age Einstein used to wear the same sort of formal dress, this is because that was his unofficial uniform which he had to adhere to. The military uses uniforms because it increases discipline, bring forth unity and actually creates a pride within the wearers of their organization.

5. My opponent, it seems did not read his own source, while normal clothes cost an average of 72$ per month, by his own statement, school uniform (according to his source) costs 156 and 140$ per year. This means that at one point students only have to spend 160$ or so and at another you spend 864$$ per year. I believe the point is quite clearly made here.

6. You need to realize this is one way to curb bullying as I already showed this would affect, at the very least 160,000 children which is a major enough number, seeing as it is only for America. In third world countries like Pakistan often students buy cheap school uniforms are wear those everyday instead of having to buy different clothes which are pricy. This does curb bullying, yes bullies may find other ways but they will have one way less, and that is enough, considering how is builds discipline, and prepares one for the future, to keep school uniforms.

The resolution is defeated.
Onto you Pro,

Debate Round No. 1


1. However, some jobs require choosing clothing carefully. If students aren't trained in school for these jobs, then they will have a hard time choosing which clothes to wear and which clothes should not be worn.

2. While there are other ways to express oneself, clothing is the majority of what is expressed: one can express that they like their beard...

One can also show their love for Airmax in a live debate...

And so on. This just shows two examples of how one can express their personality or likes throughout their clothing. Thus, it is irrefutable proof that uniforms restrict the freedom of expression, which goes against the US constitution. Again, I stress the fact that we are expected to uphold the constitution. [2]
In addition...two students even won a Supreme Court case against armbands!! [1] If even armbands can express personality, just imagine what shirts and pants can do. Source [4] supports this further with ""Clothing choices are rarely neutral, and our inner secrets can be read in our choices. " As shown, clothing really does express your personality.

3. Uhhh....I did. The Notre Dame University study performed by two "professors of sociology"? [1] Another link that proves that uniforms have negative impact.

4. Sorry about that. Here:;. Your argument about military is irrelevant, we are talking about school uniforms. As for Einstein, who knows if he was in his right state of mind? I mean, he even stated himself "I want to go when I want. It is tasteless to prolong life artificially. I have done my share, it is time to go. I will do it elegantly." [3] This is really strange, I mean. He could have definitely done more. Was it the stress upon him? Was it too much work? We might never know, but this just show how complicated the situation was to Albert Einstein.

5. However, for poorer families, it is much harder to get a massive 156$ for the beginning of the school year and spend all their money on it, rather than spending just half as much per month, because we know that salary is paid monthly, therefore each month the poor family has to save up a little bit in order to pay the 156$. But let's not forget that they already have to pay taxes. [5]

6. One way less, one way more. I have already shown that the silence cue is practically a bait for bullies.

Congradulations that you think you defeated my resolution. You may as well be the first person to beat me in a School Uniform debate, but I have attacked stronger than ever. (Especially the first round)

Back to you, con.

[3] Cohen, J.R.; Graver, L.M. (November 1995), "The ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm of Albert Einstein", Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics 170 (5)


I thank my opponent for his reply. I shall be tackling his arguments the way they are numbered.

1. I believe my opponent lives on extremes, he fails to realize that these children can choose what to wear when they are at home, or when they go to parties. On weekends and in summer vacations, it is quite clear that these children do get the training for choosing clothes. Not to mention who needs training in looking for what to wear? The school however has the duty to teach them discipline and how they have to dress in most of their future jobs. In such it is clear that there is a greater productivity in asking children to wear uniforms. My opponent's arguments regarding how they might not learn to wear different clothes does not stand.

2. Why is my opponent infatuated with the United States of America and its constitution? Does he realize the constitution is pro slavery? Shall we, in upholding the constitution re-start slavery? I find that this is at best an appeal to authority. Also I once more reiterate that this resolution is not bound to the United States, the example of one country is not enough. My opponent realizes that there are other ways to express oneself, by affirming this he pseudo-concedes. The reason for this is that because there are other ways the right to expression is not being harmed, since an individual does grow out of these young people, uniforms do not necessitate any bad affect. As I already said uniforms actually create unity (something my opponent conceded to) and help individuality foster in such a way that two different individuals can connect better. Surely this is better than an absolute anarchy of personalities which are 100% apart.

3. This link still does not work.

4. Another link that still does not work. My analogy with the military works because the military is one of the most disciplined institutions, the uniform helps. Also the uniform is an instant recognizability, the military takes pride in wearing their colors as do many students. If one is part of one of the best schools, or if one got into Oxford they would happily wear the insignia. Uniforms create a sense of belonging. Also you are the one who brought in Einstein in the first place...

5. You mean to tell me that it is cheaper for poor families to spend 72$ each month rather than spend a bit out of their savings or save enough so that they have to spend 150$ only once. These clothes actually even run more than a year where a lot of people wear these clothes for even two years, or three. Overall I am sure the voters are intelligent enough to realize that your point about money does not stand. Also taxes may be applicable in some countries, although in most they are quite little in amount. One must also pay taxes when buying normal clothes though.

6. Your little one way is important for 160,000 children (see source above). I think that's a big number, considering this is only of the US, add up the other countries and you have a sizeable number. You see we try to stop bullying from every perspective possible.

Voters my opponent must show that it is absolutely necessary for school uniforms to be abolished, this he does not so and therefore the resolution is defeated.


Debate Round No. 2


1. Dangit man, dangit. Why are you so good? I have to drop this point due to no rebuttal availible.

2. Actually create unity? Perhaps there's too much unity. Source 3 within round one states a parent complains... "I believe we should...advance independent, creative thinkers -- not standardized, uniformed thinkers." Frudden said. "To do anything less is to do our children and our society a disservice."

3. Reload the page once you're on it and it will work.

4. See point three for the link. Military has to fight the enemy, be heartless to the opponent, courageous and loyal to the country. School prepares you for jobs. You don't necessarily have to fight enemies in your furture jobs Military ideas do not apply to school.

5. Unfortunately I must half-drop this point. I can't rebut the fact that uniforms cost less than clothing as a whole. However, there's a reason that school uniforms are cheaper--once again, you can express more if you choose your own clothes. And also, it must be noted that if there are multiple school-age children in a family, then the cost of school uniforms is huge. Since different schools start around the same month and time, the parents will be forced to garner enough money to spent a huge amount in a very short period of time, in contrast to a big amount in a long period of time. In addition, if school uniforms get ripped or harmed, then a replacement would cost just as much, putting lots of burden on poor families.

6. Sigh....I suppose bullying does have a negative effect which must be prevented at all costs. However, is this one less way really work the trouble? (See point 7 below)

I don't have to say why it's absolutely necessary, just that there's more negative effects to having school uniforms than not having school uniforms.

Since I dropped so many darned points, I will have to construct some more.
7. Students will always find ways to express themselves, leading to less desirable forms of expression such as tattooing and piercing. I mean, nobody likes getting their freedom of expression restricted. Source [9] within round one just demonstrates this. And I just noticed that my opponent has completely failed to refute this point. Sorry I brang this up in the second-to-last round, but this is an important point that must not be avoided! (Which my opponent managed to somehow avoid without my notice) This also supports another point about how enforcing rules about uniforms is difficult, since, if students riot and complain along with their parents, complications will cause court cases, which schools don't want. Again, source [3] within round one demonstrates a court case that caused massive complications. If students don't like school uniforms, the policy can be extremely time-consuming and may not even work out! In addition, older students are more independent and feel the need for diversity and individuality.
Because only about 19 % of all public schools had a uniform policy, and school uniform policies are extremely difficult to enforce, it would be much easier to not require school uniforms at all. [1]

8. Even if the Student does not feel the school uniform restricts their freedom of expression, there is still the case of wearing the school uniform. Kids are very picky about what they feel comfortable wearing. Some kids are opposed to buttons, zippers and restrictive clothing, while others may be sensitive to particular materials. Some children are also uncomfortable wearing certain styles of clothing. For example, many firls do not like to wear skirts or dresses, which most girls' uniforms require.
Teenage schoolgirls standing in corridor, chatting in groups
school uniform
A picture highlighting the fact that girls have to wear skirts as school uniforms
No uniform can suit all children.

In conclusion...Although I have dropped two points and half-dropped another point, I revived and strengthened an argument within the first round which my opponent forgot to refute, and added another strong argument!
The resolution is upheld.


I thank 9spaceking for his response.

1. I thank you for conceding so graciously, I admire you for doing so. I do however remind the voters that this was one major argument presented by 9spaceking and therefore since he has conceded it, the voters should give me extra points.

2. I believe you are making a mistake here, your argument is unsupported greatly. Firstly the testimony of a parent is hardly evidence. Also let us understand that we should not live on extremes, the Uniform only gives a sense of conformity it does not automatically make a person into a robot, to insinuate such is wrong. My opponent actually concedes to the fact that it does create unity, his only argument is that it creates too much unity to the point where everyone becomes robotic. I think I tackled this when I talked about how living on such extremes is incorrect. In any case let us not forget that these children have individual personalities, and wear their own accessories, and wear what they want at home. This way the children get a place where they may express themselves, and they get a sense of conformity from their School. I believed I also talked about how many children take pride in their uniforms. If a student studies in St. Marks one of the best private schools in America they would do so quite pridefully. It so is that 9spaceking's argument does not stand.

3. The link still does not work. In any case the link is useless so long as its argumentation is not summarized. While you may have presented a link as a supporting argument of proof, you need to mention that proof and give a summary. As you have failed to do so in the first rounds, I cannot but ask the voters to disregard this link.

4. My opponent concedes the point that uniforms do help in discipline, taking the analogy works because it shows that uniforms do at the end give children discipline. Is 9spaceking trying to avow that students do not need discipline?

5. I want to begin by saying that source 9 of round 1 does not exist. Secondly I want to assert that it will make a difference to more than 160,000 students as shown in my earlier sources. I think this is a sizeable number, we dtop bullying every way we can, it seems my opponent has conceded this.

6. Firstly lets understand that 9spaceking admits his own numbers in Round 1 were flawed. Now we need to realize that clothes in such poor families are often shared, if a child grows up his clothes are given to the younger siblings. Also the contentions work for ordinary clothes as well. Seeing how by his statistic the clothes are only twice the amount of one month of ordinary clothes the family can save up and in the summer. Ordinary clothes get ripped as well. 9spaceking's stats were way off, an average American spend 2,000 dollars on clothes per year. This compared to 160$$ is such that 160$$ always wins. Also since schools are the major place for which clothes are bought this amount drops to 800$, even if you add the 160$ this makes 960$ per year which is still 1040$ less than what an average American would spend on normal clothes. Another source says students have to spend nearly 250$ a month on clothes for school alone (this 72$ figure is way off), and this puts unnecessary pressure especially on girls. Then there is this third source which claims that this mom has to spend a whooping 1400 pounds for her children's clothes to school. This makes an average of 221$ per month. So the 72$ stat is way off, the comparison is between 72$ per month and 14$ per month, I think the voters can realize what is cheaper.

7. Here my opponent shows that he agrees with me on principle, just not on practice. By giving an argument on how the practice is difficult to enforce he shows he does not have any arguments against the principle. As this debate uses the word 'should' it is a debate of principle as this point becomes moot. In any case while this may be in America, many schools around the world use uniforms and students conform to them. It is after all not that difficult to enforce. Also I have already spoken about how it is not so severe that students will get tattoos just because they are asked to wear uniform, no one in my school has yet done such a thing to the best of my knowledge. Also students are allowed to wear bangles or earring or watches which allow them to express themselves. The personality also matters and it grows, also since students can wear ordinary clothes at home this problem only appears to be one, and does not stand.

8. These girls seem: a. hot, b. comfortable. Most uniforms are comfortable and by the list my opponent has shown there is a slight selection on whether to wear t-shirts, shirts, or sweatshirts. So this point also does not stand.

I thank my opponent once more, he has been most gracious!
The resolution however collapses.

Debate Round No. 3


2. Unfortunately this I must concede. So many conceded points!!

3. I did summarize it. If you look back I stated that this link was to the Notre Dame research which showed school uniform's negative impacts.
Link one last time in hope that it works: .

4. Uh, yes?

5. I meant source 3.

6. Oh, snap! I can't rebut that. Now I have to drop the other half.

7. Curse you!! I can't rebut that either.

8. Looks can be decieving.

It seems that I have lost most arguments. However, I remind you that Ajab had unfairly put the BoP on top of me, which I didn't realize was fair until in the comments section... "If you had said we had shard BoP, it would have been more fair", pretty much conceding that he made the debate unfair.

Finally, I will pull out my trap card, as we never mentioned whether trolling was allowed or not. Good luck countering the troll argument presented below.

Look at those smiling students. They look pretty happy, don't they!
Well, I'll tell you something--you're wrong! They aren't happy. Why? Because they love the race they are... Look at their skin color! No offense, and not being racist, it's true--they all have the same skin color! And their uniforms--their uniforms all have to same colors! We can logically deduce that if uniforms are worn then people have the same skin color. This is actually a crude experiment by an evil genius scientist to turn all the school's poor children into his evil robot slaves! Look at them, they're all the same--shoes, hand motions, even the creepy way they smile is exactly the same!
If you aren't convinced, take a look at this other picture...

Look! They're all the same! Sure, the blond girl seems to be unaffected as the others, but streaks of brown can be seen! Oh god, save us! And only one person has glasses on! Look at the guy on the left, the guy two seats to the right, and two seats to the right, and the guy two seats to the right...that's right! All of them are trying to cross their legs, copying the guy on the rightest and the girls too! It can be concluded this photo was taken while the transformation was happening...this is terrible!

The consequences are unimaginable. One word? Destruction. Two words? Take-over. Three words? [BLEEP] us all.
I know, you might say "hey, what proves that these robots are destructive? Why couldn't they be nice?" Well, I say, it's the evil genius scientist who designed these robots. He's gotten so far ahead that the earliest one of his robots has grown into an adult!

Look at her eyes, how they bore into you....they hypnotize you and yet they look faraway, having lost their sentience long long terrible! Fortunately these robots have yet to outnumber normal human beings, so we should stop them while we still can!
Ban school uniforms!!

Good debate. :P


I thank 9spaceking for his response and for instigating this excellent debate.
I should like to remind all that since 9spaceking instigated this debate he chose the resolution and the Proposition position himself. As such I did not force him into accepting the BoP, he put the BoP on himself. I once more cite the Latin rule: "Onus probandi incumbet ei qui deciet, non ei qui negat."
With that in the clear, let us now begin!

1. My opponent has conceded this.

2. My opponent has conceded this.

3. He did not summarize what negative impacts and why these negative impacts occured. If his argument bases itself solely on the expression argument he has himself conceded it earlier and therefore this point becomes moot. Also I have tried many times, the page fails to display.

4. He makes a positive claim, which seems quite trollish. In essence discipline is needed because schools help to prepare children for the future, where they will have to follow a set of laws, such as that of a country. A school teaches them all this. Also by raising this point 9spaceking concedes that uniforms help in discipline.

5. I do not have access to source 3, also it is a purely American source and American law cannot be applied to other countries.

6. My opponent has conceded this.

7. My opponent has conceded this.

8(a). Let me start by clarifying that according to the rules you placed the BoP on yourself, whether it put the odds in my favour or not is irrelevant.

8(b). I think I will argue with pictures later. First of all you have the burden to prove that such an evil scientist lives. You also have the burden to show that these children will be made into robots. Also there is a brown haired person who does not cross his legs. Untill you can prove this your argument is moot, the resolution does not stand, and I win.
s://; alt="" />
School Uniforms are often hot:
s://; alt="" />
Sweet Jesus!

s://; alt="" />

Debate Round No. 4
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
9spaceking sources were broken until the end, and I slashed your errors at the end, while your errors were in the beginning, and obviously my troll arg.s dealt me great harm as well
Posted by Ajab 7 years ago
I do not think I deserved Conduct and Source points....
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
darn....oh well.
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
*crosses fingers*
errrr....hopefully no one will vote within these 9 days and 12 hours....
please let it be a tie...
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
unfortunately I dropped far too many points. There is simply too much benefits that school uniforms bring; last time I narrowly got beaten, this time I get beaten. I know when my arguments are weak or not.
Posted by Ajab 7 years ago
Dude I have not beaten you yet. You could still win you know.
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
oh, no. Well congrats on being the first person to ever beat me in a School Uniform debate! It was good battling you.
Posted by Ajab 7 years ago
Wanna debate smoking?
Posted by Ajab 7 years ago
People will vote on it :P
I have joint the Supreme Council of Determination so people like blade, Wylted, whiteflame will be voting/
Posted by 9spaceking 7 years ago
you 1. didn't forfeit
2. Made me concede many, mane points
Unless, of course, nobody votes on this, in which case, we'll tie, and I'll remain...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: pro conceded points, con rebutted well. gg
Vote Placed by Anonymous 7 years ago
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Ow, with a lot of conceding and broken links, I have to say 9spaceking's streak is over.

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