Total votes: 4
Pro gave a clear reason: reform is needed to avoid a ban, which Con never fully denied.
Pro showed Best.Korea has empathy and dedication, proving change is possible and worthwhile.
Con nitpicked definitions but failed to refute the core argument about sustainability and community impact.
Pro offered a practical, step-by-step reform plan—Con didn’t give any alternative.
Overall, Pro addressed the real issue with solid reasoning, while Con stayed in semantics.
Forfeiture.
7000series (Con) had a stronger argument overall, as they successfully challenged the definitions and provided alternative religions with significant contributions. While FishChaser made passionate points, many were based on faith-based assumptions rather than objective comparisons.
Pro (FishChaser) argued Christianity as the ultimate fulfillment of Judaism with its positive societal impact (charity, hospitals, etc.).
Con (7000series) argued that Judaism is foundational to Christianity and emphasized Islam's contributions to various fields like science and philosophy.
Convincing arguments: Con (7000series) – More balanced and logical.
Reliable sources: Tie – Both lacked specific citations.
Legibility: Con (7000series) – Clearer structure.
Conduct: Tie – Both maintained respect and professionalism.
this is wht i felt, so
Con had the stronger debate strategy because they:
/ Focused on logic and research methodology rather than overwhelming lists of claims.
/ Successfully debunked Pro’s argument style (Gish gallop, correlation vs. causation issue).
/Used more structured rebuttals.
Pro had strong points but lost because they relied too much on quantity over quality and failed to engage with Con’s direct criticisms.