David

Sounds good. I would propose the following resolution "Resolved: That we should support the Muller investigation" or "Resolved: The Muller investigation should be continued."

I'd be happy to take the pro side in a debate with you

bump. Would love a few votes

That was my favorite line of the entire debate!

"How many times has Virt had to defend your feeder"

LOL!!!!

Sounds good!

Indeed it is!

this should be fun

If you have any questions about my vote, please let me know. I did the best I could to be objective and explain what I liked about each song.

Confirmed

Your feedback was great!! Thanks so much for taking the time for this debate. I know it was long and theee was a lot to pack in.

I promise to leave a fairly good RFD

Ok. Will listen after work

I’ll listen. Tag me when it’s over and I’ll vote

Thanks so much! Bsh is a worthy opponent. One of the best I’ve ever seen

Thanks for the RFD!

Understood! I want votes on this debate https://www.debateart.com/debates/338

Thanks for the feedback!!

This is gonna be a good debate. Tag me when it's over.

When you debate professionally, you’re often given a resolution and then are forced to do either pro or con regardless if you believe it or not. Debating is a sport, not a missionary activity. We aren’t out to concert anyone to our viewpoint.

I'm almost finished. Probably 330

I’ll try

Within the next 3 hrs

I'm almost finished my arguments.

Thank you. Will have them up probably late tonight or tomorrow afternoon

Yeah. That's always been my downfall. I get into too many debates at once.

Thanks so much for your feedback and a great RFD!! I'd definitely love to improve my debate skills.

No he did not. He stated the resolution is affirmed and to vote for him. That's standard practice. I've seen him do it in every single debate

vote deleted. You should be able to revote now

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block19 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 7 points to Con for arguments, sources, s/g and conduct
>Reason for decision: cause yeah
>Reason for Mod Action: None of the points are explained and thus is insufficient.
************************************************************************

It's ok!

ROFL!

Yes you can as long as the disclose doesn't relate to another user.

Tej can certainly override me. The vote is sufficient whether or not you agree with it.

He thoroughly explained both points. He examined the sources and weight why one was better than the other. He also explained the conduct point well enough to justify it.

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: MagicAintReal // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to con for arguments, sources, and conduct
>Reason for decision: See vote
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote is more than sufficient
************************************************************************

Ah I gotcha. I'm sorry. But since you voted for the other person, I still had to delete the vote.

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Wylted // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 3 points to con for arguments
>Reason for decision: See vote
>Reason for Mod Action: This is borderline so as per the standards, we will let the vote stand.
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 3 points to pro for arguments.
>Reason for decision:The topic I am pro gun: Change my mind is a difficult one to argue. It seems like both sides were arguing whether gun ownership was more of a benefit to American society than a negative, that is what i am basing my decision on. I give my vote to Our_Boat_is_Right because because he took an over all approach to guns and therefore seemed to make the more convincing argument.
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter fails to sufficiently justify awarding argument points. The voter fails to survey the main arguments in the debate and to weigh those arguments to produce a decision.
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ralter // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: 3 points to pro for arguments
>Reason for decision: See vote
>Reason for Mod Action: The vote is more than sufficient
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Alec // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to con for sources, conduct, and arguments.
>Reason for decision:
Better conduct: The BoP was on Pro and Pro didn't prove anything except using cites from the bible. Although there is proof of God's existence(sadly), Pro failed to present any proof of God whatsoever. Con wins by my vote.
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter fails to survey the arguments and the conduct point is not sufficiently explained
************************************************************************

Mod note

Several votes were reported. This is a full forfeit debate and votes are not moderated

I'm sorry. But pro didn't cite anything so how could you even give him that point?

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Alec // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to con for sources, conduct, and arguments.
>Reason for decision:

Convincing arguments: I got convinced by Con.
Most reliable sources: Con cited. Pro did not.
Better conduct: I think Pro's account got hacked, because I don't think this is like Our Boat is Right. However, I still award Con conduct points. Pro called Con a racist in round 1 and forfeit round 2. I quote from Round 1 what Pro said: "My opponent is wrong, and is biased because doesn't like Warren or her Indian heritage.". What happened Boat Right?

>Reason for Mod Action: Failure to explain all points
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Raltar // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 2 points to pro for sources
>Reason for decision: Pro provided valid sources and used them effectively to prove his point. It seems something went awry in regards to Con's response, and I personally think the larger issue was ignored here..
>Reason for Mod Action: The voter fails to properly explain this point.
************************************************************************

Me to! In fact this is probably on of my favorite debates of all time.

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Block19 // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 5 points to Con for arguments, sources, and conduct.
>Reason for decision: Con addressed both sides of the issue properly and behaved more honorably than Pro did when they instigated this discussion. Con also used better and more objective sources, for these reasons i have awarded the following points.
>Reason for Mod Action: None of the points are explained and thus is insufficient.
************************************************************************

Sorry for the ff. I overslept and didn't realize how little time I had. I had my arguments 90% finished

https://archive-media-1.nyafuu.org/vp/image/1522/20/1522201804169.jpg

Lol.

And wow - your arguments are almost entirely irrelevant to the debate.