Instigator / Pro

Skipper_Sr

1512

rating

debates

42.31%

won

Topic

#4180

You Choose Topic & I Choose Side

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 3 votes and with the same amount of points on both sides...

It's a tie!

Tags

People

Parameters

Publication date: 02.12.2023 03:47AM
Last updated date: 04.16.2023 04:49AM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 4
Time for argument: Two weeks
Max argument characters: 30,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

Sir.Lancelot

1587

rating

182

debates

55.77%

won

Description

The Category is labeled "People," but the category can be anything

Round 1

Skipper_Sr

02.12.2023 01:43PM

Pro

Awaiting Con's Topic Decision.

Would you rather me state which side I choose in the Comments Section or in my Round 2 introduction?

Sir.Lancelot

02.12.2023 07:59PM

Con

McDonald's has an origin story of greed.

Round 2

Skipper_Sr

02.13.2023 08:16PM

Pro

I choose Con and Sir.Lancelot is Pro

This means the BoP is on Sir.Lancelot because he has made the claim "McDonald's has origin story of greed." For Con (me) to win, I have only to disprove his arguments.

Vague/Clarity

Which Story Precisely?

Pro's claim is a little imprecise as to the "origin story." Is Pro saying, "McDonald's has AN origin story of greed," or, "McDonald's origin story IS a story of greed"?

This may not matter depending on how Pro introduces his arguments. This was worth bringing up to possibly lessen the presence of semantics.

McDonald's Fast-Food Restaurant, Right?

I am fairly certain Pro is speaking about the McDonald's fast-food restaurant. If he is not, I will be confused.

My Pseudo-Intro

I need to clarify that I have no arguments to counter yet, so this is not a full-scale introduction argument because I do not have the BoP.

McDonald's Origin Story Is Not One of Greed

The co-founders Mac McDonald and Dick McDonald wanted a quality restaurant for their customers. They were not greedy. My source specifically says, "They didn't want to expand; their life was great.... They were working hard in their McDonald's restaurant.... They weren't hyper ambitious to dominate the world."

Specify "Origin Story"

If Pro ignores my previous points, then we need to specify what the origin story of McDonald's really is.

Sources:

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/02/09/ray-kroc-mcdonalds-fast-food/amp/

Sir.Lancelot

02.27.2023 08:16PM

Con

Forfeited

Round 3

Skipper_Sr

03.04.2023 04:56AM

Pro

Restated

McDonald's Origin Story Is Not One of Greed

Sources

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/02/09/ray-kroc-mcdonalds-fast-food/amp/

Sir.Lancelot

03.08.2023 05:09PM

Con

Skipper is right.

Mac McDonald and Dick McDonald were not greedy. They were cheated from a Capitalist ploy by a man named Ray Kroc.

The original McDonald’s founders were simple men of integrity, hard-work, and valued their customers…something that was lost in the noise as American corporations have made their push forward. Ray Kroc bought the rights to McDonald’s from them after buying up the land underneath their franchisee locations and using banks and franchisees to force a sale.
The founders of McDonald’s were woefully inept and allegedly used a handshake deal for 1% of the company’s profits that never came to be. That moment reminded me all too much of the crazy events of The Social Network.

The invention of Milkshakes could have been dollar store quality like the Instant version of Ramen.

One of the main arguments the creators of McDonald’s experienced with Ray Kroc was Kroc’s desire to use powdered milkshakes instead of real milkshakes. This troubled the founders who wanted to serve real products to their customers.

The Founder – How Greed Created McDonald’s Empire – Carlos Eats

Round 4

Skipper_Sr

03.16.2023 01:29PM

Pro

Ray Kroc

After Origin

This man Ray Kroc came after the origin of McDonald's. This is evident by the fact he purchased the rights to McDonald's after its creation by Mac McDonald and Dick McDonald. Ray Kroc is not a part of the "Origin Story." He is a successor to the company in a later chapter.

Conclusion

Skipper is right.

Mac McDonald and Dick McDonald were not greedy.

Pro (Con initially but considered Pro within the debate) and I have both agreed that the original co-founders were not greedy and did not create McDonald's out of greed. I take the quote above as a concession.

Sir.Lancelot

03.17.2023 04:49AM

Con

I take the quote above as a concession.

Re-read the entire argument.

Extend.

In conclusion, Ray Kroc exploited the original founders to take over the business.

Vote Con.

Sir.Lancelot

04.07.2023 11:07PM

-->

@AustinL0926

Ty!

AustinL0926

04.07.2023 11:00PM

-->

@Sir.Lancelot

@Skipper_Sr

Done.

If either of you have any questions/objections to my vote, just let me know.

Sir.Lancelot

04.07.2023 10:30PM

-->

@AustinL0926

Could you vote on this debate?

Pretty short to read through. Might only take 1-2 minutes.

Skipper_Sr

03.22.2023 12:51PM

Semantics are like grilled scallions. I hate them. Lol

Sir.Lancelot

03.18.2023 08:56PM

-->

@Barney

Thank you sir!

Skipper_Sr

02.12.2023 08:48PM

-->

@Sir.Lancelot

"McDonald's has an origin story of greed."

Dang. I immediately thought of arguments for both sides. This will be a tough choice

Skipper_Sr

02.12.2023 01:41PM

-->

@Sir.Lancelot

Do you agree to the addition of a fifth round? Round 1 will have to be waived for both us since I need to wait for your Topic Decision, and I need to choose my side

AustinL0926

04.07.2023 11:00PM

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:

NOTE: I am referring to Skipper as CON, and Lancelot as PRO.

So this debate pretty much all comes down to what counts as an "origin story."

If, as CON claims, it counts as only the original creation of something, then he easily wins, because the McDonald brothers clearly weren't greedy - they were just running a normal, reasonably high-quality restaurant.

If, as PRO claims, it also includes the popularization of something, then he definitely wins, because the buyer of the franchise was greedy and tried to buy the brothers out using unethical tactics.

I buy PRO's interpretation, simply because first, it makes sense. An origin story is basically an entire backstory, which includes how something became popular. Second, CON mostly fails to contest this, or give me a reason why I shouldn't accept this. As such, the framework is upheld, and so is the topic statement, giving PRO argument points. Conduct to CON for forfeiture.

Slainte

04.07.2023 10:27PM

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:

This was a tough one, in part because Con and Pro are reversed. The debate was about "an origin story". Origin was never defined. Mcdonald's as we know it, versus how it was at the time, was never discussed. Both sides accept that the founders of Mcdonald's were not greedy. Con said "Ray Kroc exploited the original founders to take over the business. " Con never justified that the Ray Kroc actions constitute "an origin story". The question is, on its face, does it? I would say no. Based on the common use of the word origin. Whilst Ray Kroc did create the chains of what we know today, it was built on the foundation of others, and that would be the origin. Source/Spelling tie. Conduct Pro for the forfeit.

Barney

03.18.2023 08:55PM

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:

Conduct for forfeiture.

Con was able to show that McDonalds as we know it has an origin story of greed. Pro did little to push back on this, mistaking cons words for a concession.

Exactly what constitutes an origin story is ambiguous. It leaves key events in the distant past as fair game unless there’s a significant reason to rule when the origin must cease.