Kohai

Please vote when you get a chance. Should be an easy vote

Great debate!

Does this have to be a recurring / main character or can it be a special character from a special episode?

This looks interesting and I'm almost tempted to accept. The question is how is "funny" being defined and what criteria is being used to determine which character is funnier than another?

Remind me to vote on this

Thank you, Whiteflame!

<p>>Reported Vote: Ultracrepidarian // Mod action: Removed</p>
<p>>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy</p>
<p>>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>>Reason for Decision: other</p>
<p>>Reason for Mod Action:</p>
<p>Voter requested this vote be removed. </p>

<p>---Ultracrepidarian's former vote---</p>
<p>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>Simply, Con does not sufficiently undermine Pro's assertion that all states have the right to exist, and that Israel is a state. Therefore, this point goes to Pro. This was a debate about definitions, and Pro managed to firmly establish what "the right to exist" is using various sources and reasoning.

</p>

Do you want me to remove your vote?

Thanks for the vote

Total nonsense > AI arguments. Stop copying and pasting from AI. This could eventually result in moderation action and include site bans.

Spaces are not included in character count

I ran this through a word counter. There are about 10,500 words excluding sources.

I know. I feel so old. I’ve been on DDO/DART for the last 15 years. It’s literally been with me for half of my entire life.

Sure you can run some arguments by me.

Great questions. 1) they’re mostly just definitions 2) Of course my opponent is free to challenge the fine tuning premise. We can certainly debate the differences in laws as well.

Interested?

Remember this is your final round. You must waive the next round

<p>>Reported Vote: FLRW // Mod action: Removed</p>
<p>>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy</p>
<p>>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>>Reason for Decision: fails-to-analyze</p>
<p>>Reason for Mod Action:</p>
<p>Quoting from the debate is not enough. Voters must thoroughly analyze the arguments given and explain how they impacted the debate. </p>

<p>---FLRW's former vote---</p>
<p>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>Pro has better arguments that God is not just. In round 3 he states: My opponent claimed genes and diseases were pure result of human willing actions, but think of the absurdity of such a position. Who dictated that some actions result in gene alter and diseases? Humans cannot dictate that. I cannot create specific custom genes by my own free will, nor custom diseases at will. Likewise, first humans logically couldn't choose their own genes and attributes, as those couldn't exist after them, but only before them. And think of further absurdity: If genes and diseases were only controlled by free will or willing action, I could fully control people's genes and diseases by my will alone, or willing action alone. But no one can do that, thus it takes more than free will or willing action to create diseases and genes. This is especially because causation link between willing action and specific disease or gene, isn't itself chosen, but created by God. Since such link is created by God and affects people differently, we can conclude that God isn't just.</p>

<p>>Reported Vote: FLRW // Mod action: Removed</p>
<p>>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy</p>
<p>>Voted for: con</p>
<p>>Reason for Decision: fails-to-analyze</p>
<p>>Reason for Mod Action:</p>
<p>Quoting from the debate is not enough. The voter must analyze the arguments made and explain how this quote / argument impacted the debate. </p>

<p>---FLRW's former vote---</p>
<p>Voted for: con</p>
<p>Con's statement in round 4 says it all. "Police brutality refers to law enforcement officers (Whom I call police) using excessive force, such as the murder of George Floyd. By all prevalent definitions police brutality does exist."</p>

I knew you’d like it! I knew ChatGPT would have some utility in debates!

Just for you!

That’s exactly why Jews don’t believe in the devil.

<p>>Reported Vote: Thoth // Mod action: Removed</p>
<p>>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy</p>
<p>>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>>Reason for Decision: fails-to-analyze</p>
<p>>Reason for Mod Action:</p>
<p></p>

<p>---Thoth's former vote---</p>
<p>Voted for: pro</p>
<p>Some of Con's points made me want to slam my keyboard, but I have to leave aside my frustration at Con's arguments and vote on the debate as it stands before me. Con fired round after round of grapeshot at the broad side of a barn but somehow still never hit the target. Pro cleanly refuted all of Con's points, or at least all the points he needed to refute, with clearly explained facts from credible sources. Notwithstanding that Con's position is untenable to the point of being unwinnable.</p>

Sounds cool. Looking forward! Hopefully this is the first debate of many

Ugh sorry for the horrible formatting

Same! I have a big love for modal logic.