Instigator / Pro
2
1500
rating
3
debates
66.67%
won
Topic
#5084
I'm better than you
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
buttmaggot15
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 2,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1264
rating
363
debates
39.81%
won
Description
Resolution:
Pro is better than Con.
Round 1
Trigger warning, by the way.
Ad hominem is relevant to the resolution. I'm going to be roasting. Con's roasts directed at me are welcome.
Apparently the debate's not rated. That's news to me.
Anyway, the measure of a man.
Humanity is obsessed with superiority and inferiority. Pride, ego, the sense of self worth and value.
The measure of a man varies from one man to the next, and often men choose to believe that it's whatever they're good at. How convenient.
Being that this is a debate site a premium would be placed on moral superiority, debating ability, intelligence and intellectual ego.
So, lets start with those.
I'm morally questionable but I love the truth. It's a beautiful thing. It feels so much better to crush your rival's spirit with honor. It's clean. It makes me proud. I love it when I win.
Second, the intellectual issues. I am intelligent and a good debater. My IQ is probably between 120 and 130 and while I don't have much of a record here, the content of this debate should speak for itself. I also encourage users to view the other debates. I am a convincing person and the reason is that I argue the facts and the evidence only in the ways that convinced me personally. I know that I'm reasonable and being honest with my reasoning is the best way to convince in my view.
Other issues - ? Well, lets shift to the general. I'm successful, self-made, ambitious, tall, handsome, well off, good breeding stock and I got a good sized pecker. I got a wonderful girlfriend and we do it all the time. My life's wonderful and I deserve it. I worked hard for what I have.
Con - Not a good debater. Bad record. Satan worshipper apparently. Autistic with a 3 inch pecker.
What else is going on with him?
Lets see:
"Truth is ugly. There is no point in knowing the truth.
I prefer to live in delusion, because delusion is a better place to live in.
Fuck the truth."
Escapism. People do this when their lives suck, and if your life sucks then you probably suck at life.
So where is the roast?
Round 2
Con doesn't want to play.
Vote Pro.
Sorry, I just thought you will mock me for being raped and then tell me to kill myself.
The things you mentioned simply pale in comparison. Everything you said pales and I dont like when things pale.
Round 3
Con has made no arguments with respect to the resolution. Rather, his arguments are unsupported, conclusory rebuttals. Con's arguments are poor and with little effort. Vote Pro.
I do, however, say that I must appreciate Con showing me that I shouldn't trust my opponents to put much effort in to their debates. In the future I will always require my opponent to put the effort in first.
You also didnt mention how I was circumcised and how I have a bent dick, and that I am map.
Oh well, I look forward to same but rated debate so I gain rating. I like rating. I am currently 4th on leaderboard, but soon I will be number one.
Did I just start a war? 😮
Yes, you did. Thats why you would attack an IQ claim. Its the only thing in the debate you commented on and it wasnt a very significant part of it. I wasnt born yesterday.
My previous message was never an intention to harm you in any way, it was only an observation of mine. I do believe what I'm saying, and I could be wrong, perhaps my estimation of your verbal reasoning and verbal comprehension could be lower than 100 IQ, and that is possible.. because it's also easier to score lower than scoring high on any test in general (this is not a standard thing, it's just "common sense")
You should note that scoring low or high on a subtest for example "Verbal reasoning" or "Verbal comprehension" in general shouldn't in general determine your full-scale IQ score, because it is not the only determinate.. your full-scale IQ score should be determined by all subtests within IQ tests. It's possible that your full-scale IQ could be higher or lower, and it is your full-scale IQ that matters the most. (People sometimes think the fluid reasoning part matters more but truly, your full-scale is what's the most important. I believe that with your full-scale, certain people and societies would accept you to join them, if you wanted to).
IQ tests are to be taken seriously, the media in general thinks that it's a joke and that it is something that can be picked up by hand easily and put down easily by hand just like picking up a rock and putting down a rock by hand.. there are however.. people that are limited to picking up rocks and putting them down by hand.. for example.. people who don't have hands and people who don't have arms. These people are simply incapable of picking up a rock by hand, why? Well it's obviously because they don't have hands and are disabled which implies that the rock is the IQ test and the hand is simply people's brains in analogy.
..
People don't understand that taking IQ tests and scoring on an IQ test has limitations. That's one of the things that makes them very serious.. and it also currently plays the most role in making IQ tests very serious.
Anyways, aside from thus little story I've given you, I have to mention something from my previous message again.. "you shouldn't trust my reason of you and my analytical approach of you (of which is observed)"
.
.
.. This mention also means not to trust my observation of you.. it means that you should not trust what I have observed from you, there is always a misinterpretation of things given online.. specifically this website.
Dude you're just saying that cuz you want to hurt me. Doubt you really believe what you're saying, and even if you did, you're wrong.
"My IQ is probably between 120 and 130 "
To be reasonably honest and analytical with you.. based on your arguments and variation of thinking and reasoning in general, when it comes to arguments.. your arguments do not surpass an IQ between 100 and 117 when it comes to verbal reasoning and verbal comprehension in general.. where 100 IQ is more likely to get and 117 IQ is more unlikely to get.. (this reasoning was done by the judgement of verbal reasoning and verbal comprehension)
And that is as if you'd take a professional test.. which is significantly "more difficult" than online tests in general. The reason to why I'm addressing or including the statement "more difficult" is not because of the situation linked with the person and the IQ test.. It's because of a situation where only IQ tests are compared to each IQ tests.. and not because of the person's ability to consider it "difficult".
By "more difficult", I specifically mean the durability and the g-loading of the test in general.. because each tests have their own format and their own special problems that need to be solved correctly. The durability and g-loading of the tests is simply referring to how valid and reliable it would make the test.. in terms of giving the test the ability to properly measure intelligence (or g). We have tests that have different measuring systems and tests that have similar measuring systems ( (like two tests with different SD's; WAIS-IV (15 SD) and SB-IV (16 SD), or WAIS-IV (15 SD) and SB-V (15 SD) which in a way are the same).. and those measuring systems include statistical identities such as "Standard Deviation" or usually referred to as "SD" for an abbreviation of "Standard Deviation". But, that's enough information for me to use in order for you to "get the idea" (speaking metaphorically and in colloquial use).
But of course, you shouldn't trust my reason of you and my analytical approach of you (of which is observed). You can always try to prove things wrong, especially this abstract observation. But also.. don't forget.. there is a chance that you will fail at proving me wrong.
Well, let me know when you can accept a rated debate.
I'm agreeable to debating the topic again as rated debate so long as you go first in the first round. BTW I didnt know about your rape story but it wouldnt be relevant to the resolution anyway so I wouldnt have made that argument.
Gonna roast you here btw. Ad hominem is relevant due to the resolution.
In that case a rated match isn't much of an option here unfortunately. Maybe next time.
You need to complete 3 standard debates. Then you can create or accept a rated debate.
TBH I think you probably have to be the one to make it because whenever I try to make debates they always get set to "standard" rather than rated. It's probably because my account isn't flagged for voting yet or something.
Well that's a long time. Maybe they can change the debate setting for us somehow.
Few days.
How long would that take?
Or just wait for me to finish one of my debates. Then we can have same debate just rated.
If you would like I can repost it as a rated debate and we can request moderator deletion of this one.
Great. I just wish it was rated so I dont waste time for nothing.
You wont stand a chance. Nobody is as good as me.
If I wanted a challenge, I wouldnt be on this site. I am just here to argue with idiots because its funny to argue with idiots. Idiots are what makes my life fun.
Do you really want to challenge me or are you just looking for some erotic humiliation?