Debate.org is an excellent way to relieve an argumentative nature.

I want everyone to vote strictly by logic, if you will, and please, read the entire case. No hate speeches/flames and I would ask that sexycracker and dbaldwin1215 not vote as they have a character bias against myself. Korezan, if you would like to exemplify anyone who should not vote on this debate, please say so. Now that the formalities are out of the way, let the refutation begin! My opponent's entire case rests on one contention based on a deduction, not a fact. Deductions would be fine (Rather, this contention was based on the inductive sense) The inductive nature my opponent procures would be fine if not for one thing: You used Merriam-Webster (A personal favorite of mine and I thank you for being consistant with the present source) to define better but did not use it to define Superior. This is flawed as my opponent had to make an assumption. My opponent assumed superior meant best. This is flawed in two different spectrums: 1) A superior in correlation to a subordinate does not always mean the highest on the ladder. IE. Jane is a field worker Josh is a manager Jimmy is a supervisor Kalie owns the company. Josh is superior to Jane in that aspect, Jimmy is superior to Jimmy in that aspect, and Kalie is superior to Jimmy in that aspect. Conversely, Josh is inferior to Jimmy and Jimmy is inferior to Kalie. Jane is inferior to all of the above. The superiors in this situation are not equal and all axcept Kalie have a superior. Therefore, superior deals with rank. 2) Merriam-Webster has many definitions of the word "Superior" Superior as: "1: situated higher up : upper 2: of higher rank, quality, or importance 3: courageously or serenely indifferent (as to something painful or disheartening) 4 a: greater in quantity or numbers b: excellent of its kind : better 5: being a superscript 6 aof an animal structure : situated above or anterior or dorsal to another and especially a corresponding part bof a plant structure : situated above or near the top of another part: as (1)of a calyx : attached to and apparently arising from the ovary (2)of an ovary : free from the calyx or other floral envelope 7: more comprehensive 8: affecting or assuming an air of superiority : supercilious" As that was my opponent's only contention, I shall build my framework hence. For the following two contentions, debate. org is an exemplary or "Excellent" way to relieve an argumentative nature 1) Many schools do not have debate teams, as my opponent has provided as an alternative. A) Students may start their own team, but as seen in Mansfield High School, Boston, MA, students don't get the necessary funding for such trips to other schools. B) The resulting action: Use debate. org. Though some sites have forums designed for user interaction/collaboration, they are usually limited and don't include very prosperous debators. My opponent, for example, is an excellent debator by example as well as HadenQuinlan, Geekis_Khan, and CalebFrye, to name a few. These debators would most likely not waste their time on anything BUT a site specifically designed for debating. 2) Many students, as seen in my own high school, tend to lean towards arguing with authority figures if they cannot express an argumentative nature. A) I am a prime example and you may ask anyone that goes to my school. I could not argue with people without being lashed out at or being disciplined by higher authorities (As I am an IE kid and cannot find a PF partner, I cannot debate on the team without resorting to LD which I feel would be a harder transition. ) B) Several friends of mine find the need to argue even with debate team release and since joining debate. org, do not argue with authority figures quite so much. C) Debating on a team would limit you to topic and "moral" acceptability. That is not enough for some people. The NC State level resolution for PF is "Presidential Primaries are contrary to a democracy. " This is very limited and doesn't give the aggressor (The debator) a chance to express themselves argumentatively, it limits them to the "acceptable" topics. For the reasons and refutations presented to you, dear judges, you vote Pro. Thank you Korezaan I await your rebuttal eagerly. -EG