The Office (US) is funnier than _______

I am at a bit of a disadvantage. I have never seen an episode of the office. This means I am just going to drop every argument with the exception of humor being subjective argument. If that argument loses, I probably lost the debate anyway. If the argument won, than the rest of the arguments don't matter, whether I won them or not, because the rest of the arguments focus on logic as opposed to subjectiveness. I want the judges to know I did not plagiarize, before I copied and pasted that list, I clearly stated I was copying it from my source, unfortunately my source got cut off at the bottom, but I clearly stated it was a copy pasta. Here is a summary of the relevant arguments so far. Con: P1-Humor is subjective. A plainly obvious truism, people laugh at different things. P2- More people find Seinfeld funny A 60 minute poll determined more people find Seinfeld funny. . http://www.huffingtonpost.com...C1- Seinfeld is more funny. The conclusion naturally comes from the premises I have provided. So now we can merely look at the counter arguments by pro, or to see if my premises are knocked down. If his counter arguments work I lose the debate. If he undermines my premises, than he wins. Attacks on P1, humor is subjective Pro says: "Mass opinion certainly does not determine humour. I could find a vast amount of people that think its funny when people are beaten to death, that doesn't make it funny. " The statement that humor is subjective is plainly obvious by the fact that we laugh at different jokes. My opponent has made the assertion that because a joke is inappropriate, or finding a situation inappropriate is wrong, that it means it is not funny. However if a person laughs at somebody getting beaten to death they subjectively find it funny. I find it rather odd that my opponent would challenge whether humor is subjective or not. The reason we don't find Charlie Chaplin as funny as our grandparent's did is because we live in a different time, a different culture that finds different things funny. I thought Happy Gilmore was funny as a kid, it is likely because society has changed so much, my child will find Happy Gilmore to suck. SInce the defacto belief is that funny is subjective, the burden is on my opponent to show me it is not. Perhaps he can show me the pefect formula for funny, and show me how it crosses cultural lines and periods. Maybe he can show me a scientific study that proves humor is objective, but until then my assertion that it is subjective is proven every time You laugh at something the person next to you doesn't, or every time the person next to you laughs but you don't get how the joke was funny. Attacks on P2, More people find Seinfeld funnyPro says:"Besides, the poll that you are referring to is inaccurate because it simply takes the opinion of those people who chose to vote on it, which means they are most likely fans of the show. "The polls accuracy is not tainted because not everybody voted on it. Polls by their very nature cannot be given to every person on the planet, unless my opponent can give good reason to suspect that fans of "The Office" are less likely to vote on the poll, than we have to assume that the poll is an accurate representation of the general public. Here was how the poll was conducted according to Vanity Fair. "This poll was conducted at the CBS News interviewing facility among a random sample of 1,132 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone. Phone numbers were dialed from random digit dial samples of both standard land-line and cell phones. " . http://www.cbsnews.com...I see no reason to think that the poll was biased towards Seinfeld fans or against fans of "The Office". It was a good mix of land line and cell phones, so the age demographic was likely represented well. It had a large sampling size, and seeing as how the numbers were randomly selected, it probably had no racial bias or gender based bias. Conclusion I understand the burden of proof is shifted onto me, now that I have dropped every argument but the main one, but if the main one stands I have won the debate, if it falls I have lost. My opponent has challenged the premise that humor is subjective, but we all instinctively know this is untrue, because we often do not laugh atthings we wee other people laughing at, or we laugh at things nobody else finds funny. If my opponent wants to say that humor is objective, the burden of proof is on him to prove it, as is any assertion people make that defies a widely accepted belief or something that is plainly obvious. His 2nd rebuttal that the poll is biased is unfounded. It's a bare assertion, and he even states he only finds it biased because he disagrees with the conclusion. However disagreeing with the conclusion of a poll is not enough to prove it is biased. It only proves that you don't share the opinion of the respondants. Easy vote.