Instigator / Pro

seldiora

1417

rating

158

debates

32.59%

won

Topic

#2580

Pro will be Victorious in This Debate Despite Waiving Rounds 2~5

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 5 votes and with 20 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman

Tags

Miscellaneous

Parameters

Publication date: 11.02.2020 10:27PM
Last updated date: 12.03.2020 03:48AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 5
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 1,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

RationalMadman

1702

rating

574

debates

67.86%

won

Description

Victorious: achievement of mastery or success in a struggle or endeavor against odds or difficulties

Pro must prove beyond a reasonable doubt he will be victorious despite waiving rounds 2~5.

Round 1

seldiora

11.03.2020 01:10AM

Pro

In times of uncertainty and difficulty, people have refused and used inaction as a form of action itself. Perhaps the most famous was Rosa Parks sitting on the bus, refusing to stand up, for the rights of the minority, the blacks. And with many poorly paid workers, they refuse to work, showing a powerful message by expending cost and still not earning any money for the company. So here I will refuse to use the right of using my arguments from rounds 2 to 5, only using one round to clarify my stance and position, so that I will show this struggle. I will show that you can win merely from stating you are not planning to act. Because this is a very powerful message. It takes guts to go against pressure. It takes effort to actively choose to do nothing. I display my freedom of speech. I speech volumes, resonating with minority rights and workers' ideals. Even if only a few see this, they will be inspired by my action to choose to waive, and I will hence be victorious. Con will no doubt attempt many variations of attack to get me to change my mind and speak, but he will not succeed. Because my stance is strong and I have chosen to be dedicated towards this ideal. Vote for pro.

RationalMadman

11.03.2020 01:17AM

Con

R = Round

The definition of 'despite':

without taking any notice of or being influenced by; not prevented by:

Cambridge

preposition
in spite of; notwithstanding.

Dictionary.com

Pro cannot be victorious in this debate despite waiving Rs 2 ~ 5. Instead, Pro can only be victorious by being influenced by the resolutions demand that he do so.

Additionally, the description's definition of 'victorious' requires Pro to win against odds and difficulties but waiving Rs 2~5 is not difficult and his odds of doing so are 100% from his perspective.

Round 2

seldiora

11.03.2020 02:56AM

Pro

I waive.

RationalMadman

11.03.2020 03:35AM

Con

Pro's 'victory' is entirely contingent on him waiving Rounds 2 through to 5, it therefore isn't gained despite it.
Pro says he is akin to Rosa Parks, who sat on a bus and risked potentially being beaten as a hate crime for sitting in the seats intended solely for caucasians. It's actually fucking vile that he would do this to win this debate, even if it is meant as a hyperbole joke. Rosa Parks did not waive she acted extremely bravely both in that moment and throughout her life afterwards as she used the attention she gained fantastically for the improvement of civil rights for black people (and in fact for other minorities, for instance she was female and that was a time that Feminism had only just truly begun).
Pro is doing the equivalent of forfeiting every single Round after Round 1, in the Code of Conduct, this qualifies as a form of full-forfeit.

A full-forfeit debate is defined as a debate that has no argument presented by one side following the opening round.

Round 3

seldiora

11.03.2020 03:37AM

Pro

Is failing to present an argument same as refusing to present evidence for argument? My refusal here stands, self-evident.

RationalMadman

11.03.2020 03:38AM

Con

Pro didn't waive Round 3, Pro has proven the resolution untrue and can't win at all now.

Round 4

seldiora

11.03.2020 03:39AM

Pro

"To ask merely a question, present unrelated facts, seemingly random quotes, are equivalent to waiving." -- 9spaceking

RationalMadman

11.03.2020 03:42AM

Con

After using a rhetorical question as an argumentation device in Round 3, Pro proceeds to present a quote that isn't waiving.

Waiving a Round is to present absolutely no arguments of any kind inside it.

to refrain from claiming or insisting on; give up; forgo:to waive one's right; to waive one's rank; to waive honors.
Law. to relinquish (a known right, interest, etc.) intentionally.
to put aside for the time; defer; postpone; dispense with:to waive formalities.
to put aside or dismiss from consideration or discussion

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/waive

If you waive your right to something, for example legal representation, you choose not to have it or do it.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/waive

Round 5

seldiora

11.03.2020 03:46AM

Pro

I win.

RationalMadman

11.03.2020 03:48AM

Con

#10

Vinnie Paz "God Bless"

RationalMadman

11.02.2020 11:42PM

-->

@Discipulus_Didicit

This will be semantic, I won't help him win but I will let you and him know that he has to focus on semantics in order to even have a chance.

Discipulus_Didicit

11.02.2020 11:25PM

Seems like an easy win for con...

seldiora

11.02.2020 10:29PM

-->

@Intelligence_06

you can try this if you want.

Barney

11.30.2020 12:40AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Pro let himself get baited into not waiving. While the quotation later I could forgive, both the declaration of victory (a clear assertion instead of waiving) and "Is failing to present an argument same as refusing to present evidence for argument? My refusal here stands, self-evident." are not rounds wholly waived.

MisterChris

11.04.2020 08:16PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

PRO did not actually waive, thus failing to fulfill his pre-determined win condition.

fauxlaw

11.04.2020 06:26PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Argument: Pro begins an argument in R1 that s not. Inaction cannot be seen in any perspective as an action. The lack of action is not acting, but refusal to do so. The argument declines from there through the balance of rounds. Pro's resolution, successfully rebutted by Con in R1, R2, failed completely in R3 when, contrary to the resolution, pro did not waive, but offered argument. Con rightfully rebutted in R3 that Pro had thus failed to achieve a win. Plus, Con successfully argued in R2 that Pro's waivers met the condition of forfeiture. One might conclude that in R4, Pro actually offered an argument, relieving him of the Conduct charge levied by Con in R3. However, the sense of the quote, which Pro evidently believes, is that offering argument, by way of a question, is still a waiver." Unfortunately, an argument is not limited to declarative statements; questions do pose an argument. That Pro believes the quote, however, was evidence of believing to waive the Round. He must be given his due, as presenting a round of waiver. Therefore, Con's argument of conduct failure applies. Points to Con.

Sources: Pro offered a single source, but from an unrecognized and unverifiable source. Further, the quote presents a conundrum which is not true, but which Pro attempts, and fails, to demonstrate as true. which fails the notion of adequate sourcing. Cons' multiple sources firmly support his arguments. Points to Con.

S&G: tie

Conduct: Pro loses conduct points for waivers. Points to Con

Theweakeredge

11.04.2020 03:56PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Pro fails the debate out of topicality - that their argument does not fit within the resolution or breaks the resolution. By not waiving every round after the first, they necessarily lost the debate.

Danielle

11.04.2020 03:44PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

While Con's arguments were more targeted, Pro would have had a very compelling case had he actually waived. Not only did Pro fail to waive, but his remarks in the rounds could be construed as bread crumbed arguments. Con necessarily wins. Con's sources were also more constructive to the debate and topic at hand.