CreateDebate


Debate Info

6
5
yea no
Debate Score:11
Arguments:7
Total Votes:16
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yea (4)
 
 no (3)

Debate Creator

duncer(418) pic



should your argument show who + and - it?

yea

Side Score: 6
VS.

no

Side Score: 5
1 point

i think so because i wana know who in hell keeps - me i got a -15 WTF!!!!

Side: yea
pvtNobody(645) Disputed
2 points

Have you looked at what you wrote when you got that score? Although I couldn't find the specific argument you were referring to, I did find three arguments with scores of -12 and frankly I can't find a single argument that shows any signs of intelligence. So I will endeavor to enlighten you as to why you have such abysmal scores for these arguments.

Case 1: "i dident down vote you you stupid tool >.> have you even played halo wars??? you proberly havent"

There are three misspellings out of eighteen words, that's sixteen percent misspelled. Additionally out of what I can only assume is supposed to be three sentences there are zero capitalized words. In short your complete lack of grammar makes your argument utterly irrelevant, unduly antagonistic and completely lacking in substance.

Case 2: "have you played halow wars??? it is fun too send sme grunts at some one then you find out they have a fleet of vutures coming at you so you have to get shit loads of aa defence or your ed or u send a marine to scout and you see a scarab coming to you so you shit your pants"

I won't go through the spelling and grammar again, as I think I've already made my point. However I will point out the ridiculously immature syntax of this "paragraph." I've seen eight year olds that can write more eloquently.

Case 3: "this is DA BOMB it owns you can make scarabs charge at your enermy make big armys and it gets updates"

All I can say is anyone who uses the phrase "DA BOMB" seriously deserves to be shot. And finally, the utter ignorance of the opposition isn't frankly inexcusable: Red Alert 3 has two out of your three criteria for being "DA BOMB", whatever that's supposed to mean.

Side: No
1 point

The anonymity allows some people to vote against every opposing argument, making an unfair debate. Down-voting is sometimes necessary, but it does get quite irritating when an argument is down-voted for liking blue over red. Unless you prefer that spineless, cowardly way of down-voting for no reason and getting away with it. Personally, I don't down-vote unless it's completely necessary, but I would love it if all down-voting was out in the open.

Side: yea
1 point

The idea sounds good but I always put a rebuttal now some people do not but if everyone was shown I gurauntee you Duncer that you would seek revenge for downvotes. Then it would just be people DVing people to an oblivion.

I do like the forced rebuttal though that seems like a good idea.

Side: No
duncer(418) Disputed
0 points

but then you can see paterns like if someone is useing multi accounts to upvote his main or downvote others

Side: yea
frenchieak(1132) Disputed
1 point

You can't see patterns all the time. When someone composes such a terrible argument that it is a virus to the site, there are going to many downvotes. You can't go accusing everyone of having multiple accounts and being out to get you. We should just need to reply.

Side: No
1 point

Yea I have to agree on that, nobody should use multi accounts. Its immoral, and hey if you have to use other accounts then why even bother. Your just kidding yourself into thinking you are a good debator right ?

Side: yea