Instigator / Pro
9
1449
rating
14
debates
35.71%
won
Topic
#3224
THBT: drlebronski is a sigma male
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 5 votes and with 26 points ahead, the winner is...
Bones
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
35
1761
rating
31
debates
95.16%
won
Description
(joke debate)
sigma male--Sigma male is a slang term used in masculinist subcultures for a popular, successful, but highly independent and self-reliant man. Another term for a sigma male is a lone wolf.
Round 1
Forfeited
If doc was a sigma he would turn up for the debate.
Round 2
Forfeited
yeet
Round 3
If doc was a sigma he would turn up for the debate.
I now have turned up for the debate.
Per my opponents statement now that I have shown up I have shown I am a sigma male
Thx doc
-
Prelim
- I didn't think my opponent would turn up. Now that he's here, let's see if this lasts.
-
Arg 1: The Dilemma
- Russell teapot.
- Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.
- He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot, too small to be seen by telescopes, orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong.
With this tool, we can conclude Doc bears the burden of proof. He is asserting that he is a Sigma Male and yet provides no evidence to support his claim. By default, one reasonably should assume the negative to be true (there is no Santa unless proven otherwise, there are no fairies unless proven otherwise, Doc is not a Sigma Male unless proven otherwise.) As such, we can observe that the only way Doc can prevent me from automatically winning is to make a case. Doc can either
- Make a case
- Lose automatically because of Russell's teapot
Upon closer inspection, we can see that option 1 also leads to an instant loss. Why? Consider teh following segment from the CoC. People lacking in intellectual integrity will always devise more ways to cheat. If you spot some true rubbish that invalidates their argument or the spirit of debate, call it out with a vote against them on conduct (or more as warranted by the comparative arguments) and move on. A final round blitzkrieg… is when someone (usually a contender) intentionally and repeatedly withholds their argument until the end to deny the other side any chance to counter them.
As one can see, we arrive at a dilemma. Either my opponent provides an argument, thereby committing a final round blitzkrieg, or he doesn't, and he loses because he does not support his BoP. Either way, it is a loss for my opponent.
--
Rebuttals:
If doc was a sigma he would turn up for the debate.I now have turned up for the debate.Per my opponents statement now that I have shown up I have shown I am a sigma male
Unfortunately, this is fallacious thinking. Imagine if I were to go cycling training with my friend who jokingly claims he is an olympic cyclists (he's not, he's slow and he's a noob). When I arrive at the agreed destination, he is late. In my mind, I think "wow, if he was really a pro cyclist he would turn of to cycling training". And then he arrives. Does this make him an olympic cyclist? No of course not, my initial thought is not the criteria for being an olympic cyclist, it is simply a humorous and ironic statement.
Round 4
Forfeited
All charges dropped. Vote CON.
For the 3rd time...
"Should either side forfeit every round or every round after their initial arguments (waiving is not an argument), the debate is considered a Full Forfeiture,"
and where is that called ff in your pasted description?
What rounds besides the third are you claiming pro did not forfeit?
perhaps read what you post and then look at the debate...
Pro forfeited the 1st, 2nd, and 4th rounds; 75% of rounds. Not to mention that the 3rd round is merely repeating the Topic, which lack's sufficient proof of an argument's merit. Showing up is not a sufficient argument; no better than a student raising a hand to confirm presence in a classroom, which is all showing up implies, and not that participation is accomplished. Debate requires at least little more than even just participation. Allegedly, we're not children, here. Full forfeit.
Pro only showed up for one round.
From the voting policy:
Should either side forfeit every round or every round after their initial arguments (waiving is not an argument), the debate is considered a Full Forfeiture, and any majority votes against the absent side are not moderated (a vote may still be cast in their favor of the absentee, but is eligible for moderation to verify that it is justified via the normal voting standards).
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#forfeitures
how is this an FF?
**************************************************
>Reported Vote: 949havoc // Mod action: Not Removed (non-moderated debate)
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 7 to con
>Reason for Decision: See Votes Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
This debate clearly falls into one or more category of non-moderated debate, and the vote does not seem to be cast in malice. Therefore, no intervention is merited.
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#non-moderated-debates
Any unexcused forfeited round merits an automatic conduct loss, but arguments must still be voted on or justified as a tie. Repeated forfeitures waives the need to consider arguments (you still may, but by the choice of one side to miss at least 40% of the debate, the requirement ceases. And yes, this does apply to Choose Winner, which otherwise would not allow conduct to be the sole determinant).
Should either side forfeit every round or every round after their initial arguments (waiving is not an argument), the debate is considered a Full Forfeiture, and any majority votes against the absent side are not moderated (a vote may still be cast in their favor of the absentee, but is eligible for moderation to verify that it is justified via the normal voting standards).
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#forfeitures
**************************************************
he did not fully forfeit
oooooooh he showed up just on time to flex his sigma aura, that's that shit you like to see.
Fallacy counters:
Drlebronski: 0
Bones: 1(Hasty Generalizations)
/s
you're a dirty delta male