CreateDebate


Debate Info

12
23
Yes, it does. No, it doesn't.
Debate Score:35
Arguments:32
Total Votes:35
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes, it does. (10)
 
 No, it doesn't. (22)

Debate Creator

jolie(9810) pic



Simply disagreeing constitutes a valid argument.

Yes, it does.

Side Score: 12
VS.

No, it doesn't.

Side Score: 23
3 points

There's no need for long winded, drawn out, explanations, well thought out reasons backed by logic, and supporting evidence. Just tell the other person that they are wrong and be done with it. If you feel that you need to add something more, call them an idiot.

Side: Yes, it does.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
2 points

You are wrong, and an idiot. :)

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

I have aeen many people use that argument against you many times. I glad you are finally embrasing it ;)

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

It's a valid argument. But it's not very compelling. .....................................................................

Side: Yes, it does.
1 point

Yes, it is. It is very compeling.

Side: Yes, it does.
Grenache(6053) Disputed
1 point

I disagree.

And the power of my disagreement compels you. ......................................

Side: No, it doesn't.
Jace(5222) Disputed
1 point

More a statement than an argument, really.

Side: No, it doesn't.

No it doesn't and that's final, period!

You gotta add some sauce at the end.

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

I like it. You now have a hammer. Now go out there and treat every argument as a nail ;)

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

no it doesn't. if someone says something white is white simply disagreeing is not a valid argument lol because its a lie.

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

It constitutes an argument sure, but not necessarily a valid one.

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

I disagree. See how that works ;)

Side: No, it doesn't.
Cartman(18192) Disputed
1 point

You are wrong and an idiot.

Side: Yes, it does.

So, for instance, all that would have been necessary was to tell Hitler that he was wrong and an idiot. What a lot of death and destruction that approach would have avoided. If only someone had thought of that 70 odd years ago.

Side: No, it doesn't.
1 point

Wrong conclusion. How many times have you prevented calamity from humanity simply by the power of your argument? If not you, then who? Jesus tried and look where that got him. Forget about humanity, how often have you changed a single person's mind about anythi g on this site? If the answer is, not often, then a simple, short, negating argument is good enough.

Side: No, it doesn't.