Total votes: 146
Full forfeit
Forfeiture
Concession
Concession
Wow that’s a weird one
Forfeit by gugigor but conduct tied since both sides FF while RM had actual arguments. Sources tied cause neither side used sources. S/G tied because both = comprehensible
Camryn or Lily? Neither. Whitley.
Pro made the only argument. No sources by either side so it’s tied. Both sides forfeited so conduct tied. S/G to Pro cause they actually typed.
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
Forfeiture
Full forfeit
https://docs.google.com/document/d/17sRFmaSnWAgXD2ERPVvOMt36FH1FHvemwLSR-mMmkbI/edit
Lemme know if the link doesn’t work and I’ll add it to comments too.
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
FF after R1
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
Full forfeit
Double forfeiture nice
High iq debate. Learned a lot
Very informative debate
Con wins cause they said something
Interesting Debate. Con wins cause they at least said something
Full Forfeit
Full forfeit
Full Forfeit
Concession
Full forfeit
Y’all are all beautiful and don’t let anyone else tell you otherwise
Genius debate
Concession.
I sympathize with Pro’s position on this matter, but there’s just suspicion and no hardcore evidence. As a result Pro failed their Burden of Proof in proving without a doubt that mass voter fraud occurred in the nation. The poll watching case in Philadelphia was ruled constitutional by the courts. Every case nationwide was rejected by the courts on standing grounds or lack of evidence as Con mentioned in their case. Pro also in some instances used evidence that doesn’t quite connect to the the topic at hand. Trump having massive crowds doesn’t necessarily convey that he had to have gotten a higher vote and Democrats stole it from him.
Conduct to Pro because Con forfeited multiple rounds. S/G tied because grammar did not divert from arguments. Sources tied because both sides used reasonable sources to support their arguments. Arguments to Pro because Con never refuted them due to the forfeit and as a result Pro extended them.
Arguments to Con for a couple of reasons. First, Pro did not answer the question about animals attacking each other which is a legitimate concern when considering their rights, because humans cannot do anything about it. The second reason is that Pro conceded the argument of owners feeding their livestock bad food, which would be unregulatable do to the mass size. The third and final reason is that Pro conceded that the food industry created because of livestock would inherently result in their death which is fundamentally a violation of basic rights.
Sources is tied because neither side used any sources.
S/G is tied because neither side had any glaring errors that diverted from their arguments
Conduct is tied because both sides were respectful to each other and neither side forfeited in any way.
Pro forfeited so conduct to Con. S/G didn’t have any errors that caused the reader to be confused. Sources tied because both sides used reasonable and well reputed sources to support their claim. Arguments to Pro because Con never refuted their claims because of the forfeit and a full extension.
Concession
Concession
Pro had no argument while Con did. Pro did not provide any sources, while Con did. S/G tied because grammar was comprehensible. Conduct to Con because Pro forfeited.
Concession by Pro.
Concession by Pro and Con’s desire to award Conduct points to Pro for conceding.