Total posts: 352
-->
@RationalMadman
is there anyone you would rate 10 in all categories? Roy? Maybe a formal debater like Peterson or Ben Shapiro?
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
can you rate Mall lol
Created:
Posted in:
When will we’ve able to put pictures in our arguments? I feel like it’s the only reason RM hasn’t rated anyone 10/10 in presentation yet lol
Created:
Posted in:
though Oromagi has won 92 debates in a row, I decided to comb through his debates to see if anyone had a remote chance of defeating him or not. Here is the list of the people who I believe came the closest to tying or even beating him:
- Americans National Pride (VS Jeff_Goldblum): Jeff had previously won against the mighty Ramshutu and MisterChris. Ragnar's tie vote goes to show how difficult it was to judge this debate. It's hard to say if Whiteflame would've judged the same.
- MA> CA (Vs Trent0405): With Trent's highly unusual topics being his forte, you'd think Oromagi would struggle with low character count, but he takes this one nicely.
-- Germany > France (Vs Trent0405): Proving Oromagi's worth even in Trent's remote fortress once again, it's clearly quite tricky to beat Oromagi.
So I guess unless Ragnar goes all rogue or Whiteflame challenges him to the 100th debate, we won't see him being truly challenged or defeated. I expected Jeff to have a chance especially due to MisterChris's prowess falling short against him, but I guess Oromagi has really improved since DDO. My bet is Oromagi is likely now better than Ragnar, because Ragnar doesn't take big chances with more difficult debaters (MisterChris and the gang). I'm not sure who will win with Whiteflame vs Oromagi on his 100th debate, but it'll be a show to see for sure.
Created:
Posted in:
I may or may not try on my own gauntlet for size, after Ayyantu goes through, depending on if everyone is available or not. However, based on That1User's forfeiting rate, it's hard to say if he's below sum1 or above DD. Judging on his performance against me in civil disobedience, psychometric's Utilitarianism, and fauxlaw's art, he is probably below sum1.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@That1User
you are a replacement guard for intelligence if DD flops.
Created:
Posted in:
sorry I was busy (is Bear referring to Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?)
my role is bear and I am vanilla
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
to be fair, 99% of best convincing speeches are done with emotional impact and eloquence which are completely different from weighing issues and ideas. Richard Nixon would react very differently if he was debating Oromagi whether we should go to the moon, vs convincing the public whether we should go to the moon.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
The problem with your proposal is that you assume the people are open-minded (like my account arguing ridiculous things). In a debate like the Abortion against MisterChris, depending on how I'm feeling, I may either grant him many points for excellent arguments, or refuse to budge the slightest, in order to thoroughly stand my ground. The more you give up, the more your side gets shaky and you lose the debate.
Created:
Posted in:
Updated version
Today's a sad sad day
And he's up at the bay
A mysterious time to go away
Won't you sa-ay
I lost two rounds
Openin' myself to his pounds
Easily could lose
As he snooze(s)
Heyyyyyyy
Sir Local-wide
I'm 9spaceking
Elade
New York
California City
China Town
makin' beings scream cling bling
Nothin' is gonna gonna stop me
top dog yo leadin' the microphone
Zappin' poppin' off his sockets
Shoot him off a rocket
Mark my words
haha let's not darken it
Today's a sad sad day
And he's up at the bay
A mysterious time to go away
Won't you sa-ay?
I lost two rounds, and the debate
Openin' myself to his pounds, poor fate
Easily could lose, as if drinking booze
As he snooze(s), oofy oof
(Ohh) When the lights go down
and the stars come up
I'll be waitin, for you
(ohh) when everything falls through
and the catastrophe comes together
I'll be waitin, waitin, for you (woo hoo!)
Today's a sad sad day (bad day)
And he's up at the bay (no way)
A mysterious time to go away (oh hey, oh hey)
Won't you sa-ay? (Ole!)
Oh yes, I lost two rounds
Openin' myself to his pounds
Easily could lose
As he snooze(s)
[epic guitar solo]
(slow)
Poor 9sk..forfeited dos rounds
Opening up for getting zound.
Learn your lessons my friend and don't lose
So now we nod our heads off and then snooze....
Created:
Posted in:
Our newest debating member, Ayyantu, is remarkably strong as far as I'm concerned. She whipped out a very nitty gritty rebuttal against my forte and also brought up quantum mechanics (as absurd as it sounds) against Evolution. My guess would be perhaps Zaroette, maybe NiamC. Nobody super serious, but pretty strong stuff.
Created:
Posted in:
Clarification on structure: If challenger gets defeated, I believe all 5 tower positions are set back into place again and new challenger has to restart. RM was confused about my description (and I too was with Robert's "reset" idea). I feel like it'd be cheating if someone managed to defeat 4/5 and a new challenger constantly harassed the top debater thanks to the previous person's effort.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
@Ayyantu
eh. Sure, I guess. Why not. Add more challenge. You can vote if you want, Oromagi.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
to be honest, I'm just lazy and I don't want to look lazy so I didn't copy my magnus opus of 10k characters and instead stripped it down to bare minimum
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
we can do GAUNTLET 1 (R2) or something, yeah.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
@MisterChris
oh. I guess I'll just alternate between you two. You can vote first MisterChris.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
@MisterChris
well, it's all up to you now to accept nominations. I'll try not to copy my old arguments and instead rely on logic and deduction to try to disprove con's side.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
ok. Let's just have Ayyantu get wrecked first since I'm intrigued by his debating style. Then he can switch out.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
are you sure? Then it'd basically be you stomping everyone and then getting to debate whiteflame.
Created:
Posted in:
never mind, I switched sides on Social Media one. I just consider it "strong" because I'm doing major research for a school project and so I have more info available than vast majority of topics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ayyantu
rearranged tower:
I'm ready any time. Or I guess we could wait for another challenger.
Backup for intelligence: Discipulus_Didicit
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
fair enough. (you just want Ayyantu to suffer Charter School insanity, don't you :P)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
@MisterChris
I guess we technically already have a finished debate. (https://www.debateart.com/debates/2476-it-is-preferable-for-beautiful-women-to-actively-go-after-a-career-than-go-after-a-man) It's a pretty good representation of my effort in a random topic. I'll throw a bone to him. You guys can judge this in place of our "first debate". IDK if he is serious about the Evolution debate so we can wait on that if I switch around DD & Sum1. I know Robert said four rounds but I think I can I BB topics work best with 3 rounds and I'll make an exception for those type of topics.
If Ayyantu loses then he can just try again lol. We got time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ayyantu
Challenger: Ayyantu
I am not sure who is better out of DD or Sum, but based on Secret War debate I am guessing Sum is slightly stronger than DD.
Challenge Tower:
1. Whiteflame
2. RationalMadman
3. Sum1HugMe
5. seldiora
Backup:
1. Intelligence_06
Judges:
1. Oromagi
2. MisterChris
We can discuss various topics to debate to start off the gauntlet. I can debate anything, but if you wanna make it past I highly discourage any of my strongest topics (though you can take the opposing side and watch me cry). You can accept the 100 Character Limit Raise debate if you want, as well, for purpose of this tournament.
Created:
Posted in:
Since DD didn’t object to being part of tower I’ll throw him in for fun, defaulting to one level above me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
As part of the tower, I presume?
(unless you can prove you're better than intelligence, I'm dropping you below him for now)
Challenger: ???
Challenge Tower:
1. Intelligence_06
2. RationalMadman
3.
4.
5. seldiora
Judges:
1. Oromagi
Created:
Posted in:
The exact translation of "Is the pollution in the struggling cities serious?" is actually:
If you are working in a city, but there is serious environmental pollution, then you should migrate out of said city.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
edited rules:
There will be a tower of five debaters. These debaters will be ranked from lowest seed to highest seed.
A challenger will then step up. This challenger must make his/her way through the entire tower of debaters undefeated, and if the challenger wins, he will be the first winner of the Gauntlet (which, to clarify, is not a physical award).
However, if the challenger loses any debates in the challenge-tower, a new challenger will have the opportunity to try to win the Gauntlet from the start!
Within three days of the Gauntlet beginning, the challenger must PM me with the topic for the first debate, as agreed upon by both debaters. (They will choose their sides before beginning)This is intended to be a serious tournament, and troll topics or excessively pop-culture based debates ("Miley Cyrus is worse than Hannah Montana" "The Broncos are the best football team ever") are not acceptable for the Gauntlet.
Otherwise, any debates are acceptable. Some examples are http://www.edeb8.com/motions.txt (except "Only Women Should Be Allowed to Vote"), http://www.wacfl.org/joomlaweb/topics/116-lincoln-douglas-debate-topicsLincoln-Douglas, https://www.procon.org/, and even https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4690-i-can-i-bb-debate-topics (though be sure to ask me or Intelligence for the precise translation as Google Translate can be very wonky). The debate must then start within three days of my approval.
Debates will be 4 rounds, with rules in the description, and will be 3500 to 15000 characters at the debaters discretion. The voting period can be however long the debaters want, but for the sake of rapid progression of the tournament, the winner will be declared after three days. If the challenger wins, the next topic must be sent to me within three days, and the debate will be started three days later, and so on.
So without further ado, let the sign-up continue!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
pretty much. You wanna join?
Created:
Posted in:
Challenger: ???
Challenge Tower:
1. Intelligence_06
2.
3.
4.
5. seldiora
Judges:
1. Oromagi
right now intel is the most capable who has signed up so he is at the top. Will we get enough people on the tower? Who knows.
Created:
Posted in:
As the DART tournament comes down to its last round, I'd like to replicate the DDO "gauntlet tournament" since it seemed interesting. If anyone objects, let me hear it now.
As ClassicRobert said and I will paste:
There will be a tower of five debaters. These debaters will be ranked from lowest seed to highest seed.A challenger will then step up. This challenger must make his/her way through the entire tower of debaters undefeated, and if the challenger wins, he will be the first winner of the Gauntlet (which, to clarify, is not a physical award).However, if the challenger loses any debates in the challenge-tower, the gauntlet is reset and a new challenger will have the opportunity to try to win the Gauntlet!Within three days of the Gauntlet beginning, the challenger must PM me with the topic for the first debate, as agreed upon by both debaters. This is intended to be a serious tournament, and troll topics or excessively pop-culture based debates ("Miley Cyrus is worse than Hannah Montana" "The Broncos are the best football team ever") are not acceptable for the Gauntlet. The debate must then start within three days of my approval.Debates will be 4 rounds (with the first round being for declaration of rules and acceptance), and will be 4000 to 8000 characters at the debaters discretion. The voting period can be however long the debaters want, but for the sake of rapid progression of the tournament, the winner will be declared after three days. If the challenger wins, the next topic must be sent to me within three days, and the debate will be started three days later, and so on.So without further ado, let the sign-up begin!Challenger:1.Challenge Tower:1.2.3.4.5.Judges:1.2.3.
If there aren't enough guards I'll be a backup guard for the tower.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
very nice. Also, if you had to rate my old account, would you give "9spaceking" different ratings from me or not?
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
can you rank Imabench
Created:
Fully combined argument for anyone who wants to make MisterChris's argument:
Q1: If morality is objective, then we can expect virtually universal use of a standard set of moral principles, for example, concerning life, liberty, and happiness.
Q2: In the case of humans, it is because what our species believes its transcendental set of moral principles are (derived from "nature of man").
Despite different views, all of them concern similar ideas (freedom, love, etc.)
Q3: All humans use and appeal to this standard, if only subconsciously, shown within disputes that are comparable to a universal standard.
Q4: If no such standard existed, discussions would be pointless as any point of view may be dismissed immediately.
C1: Morality is objective.
Created:
-->
@MisterChris
I think the better way to phrase your arg is Roy's argument from the essential rights of mankind. That makes your argument much clearer (https://www.debate.org/debates/There-is-no-universal-moral-standard./1/)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
okay. Most enjoyable Olympic Asain sport then lol
Created:
Posted in:
Havard's free course on rhetoric. In case you ever want to gain equal footing with Oromagi. https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:HarvardX+AESTHINT15+2T2020/course/
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
am I unoriginal because I use I can I BB topics? lol. Nobody else argues them here so it's relatively "original" in comparison
Created:
Posted in:
Just my personal opinion on the leaderboards' top 10. Ratings out of 10
Attack: how well a debater refutes and notices holes in arguments
Defense: how well they support their arguments
Trickery: how well the debater thinks through the premise and argues semantics/specifics, chooses topics, as well as versatility
Oromagi
Attack: 11
Defense: 9
Trickery: 10
Ragnar:
Attack:9
Defense: 9
Trickery: 11 (never lost a debate, ever)
Ramshutu
Attack: 8
Defense: 10
Trickery: 7
MisterChris
Attack: 8
Defense: 8
Trickery: 3 (plays it straight)
Trent0405
Attack: 7
Defense: 9
Trickery: 10
Semperfortis
Attack: 8
Defense: 8
Trickery: 9
RM
Attack: 8
Defense: 7
Trickery: 5
Blamonkey
Attack: 10
Defense: 10
Trickery: 10
Intelligence
Attack: 9
Defense: 8
Trickery: 9
Nihilist
Attack: 6
Defense: 6
Trickery: 9
Created:
Posted in:
Using better verbs when describing sources
Created: