Five-Round Debates Are Inferior To Three-Round Debates

I apologize, PoeJoe, if my comments offended you. However, I would only consider two of my comments to be offensive: "For the debaters, it will cause head ache for some sensitive people such as PoeJoe. " "I hope PoeJoe wouldn't think that the the sacrifice of readability is far too great to be able to read my debate. " I have never intended to question your literacy. In fact, I would consider your literacy to be very high. However, I will address the reasons why I put these comments. I hope that if I had more comments offending you, you would be able to point them out. With that said, let the debate begin. ---- Contention 1: For the Reader ---- (1) You are suggesting that reading a 80,000 character, five-round debate will repel would-be voters. Unfortunately, many debates don't have 80,000 characters. The ones that have the most characters tend to have the most views: . http://www.debate.org... . http://www.debate.org... If you use your 8,000 characters wisely in each round, you will show effort and possibly make stronger arguments. The voting procedure is to look for: # Who did you agree with before the debate? (0 Points) # Who did you agree with after the debate? (0 Points) # Who had better conduct? (1 Point) # Who had better spelling and grammar? (1 Point) # Who made more convincing arguments? (3 Points) # Who used the most reliable sources? (2 Points) Conduct is easy to look for, since you have to look which side used fewer personal attacks. Spelling and grammar is easy of course. Just a simple action of copying and pasting into Microsoft Word. For more convincing arguments, you need to look at analysis, refutation, and organization. * Analysis - Which debater, on balance, did a better job of clearly explaining their arguments and of exposing the weakness of their opponent's arguments? * Refutation - Which debater critically analyzed their opponents' arguments the best and developed clear, appropriate, and understandable responses? * Organization - Which debater organized their arguments the best, creating an easily understood and readable path to follow? I assume that you had already read . http://www.debate.org.... Most reliable sources is also easy since all you need to do is to find sources as websites underlined in blue text and check them to see if they're reliable. Therefore, the only thing that would throw lazy or illiterate people off would be more convincing arguments assuming that they wouldn't take their time reading debates they wished to vote for. (2) There is one way to ensure equality and fairness of a debate. According to Kleptin's forum: . http://www.debate.org..., "I am pleased to announce that The Cleaners are ready to help serve the community. If you feel that a debate was won or lost based misrepresentation. A misrepresented debate would be one that is seemingly vote bombed, or that has little participation in terms of voting or commenting. " It wouldn't be easy to vote bomb anyone anymore especially in another Kleptin's forum: . http://www.debate.org... where Kleptin states that the Josh issue has been resolved. Most debates that Rezzealaux lost had three rounds, contradicting your statement that vote bombing is more effective in five-round debates. The debates he lost were: . http://www.debate.org... . http://www.debate.org... . http://www.debate.org... . http://www.debate.org... . http://www.debate.org... According to you, three-round debates should make vote bombing less effective. However, all the debates that I listed that he lost were vote bombed by Josh regardless of the amount of characters those debates contain. (3) Five-round debates can lose readers in a smear war of circumlocution. That would be if one side wasn't clear enough to be understandable. Then the points go to the other side for being clearer on more convincing arguments according to analysis, refutation, and organization. ---- Contention 2: For the Debater ---- (1) Some people need 8000 characters to successfully evaluate an issue. Other people don't. No one is forcing anyone to post an argument consisting of 8000 characters. I wasn't intending to offend you. I was just saying that you had a tendency to have more things than other people that make you mad. Correct me if I'm wrong. However, I think that most people know that +1 threads tend to make you angry. In fact, a forum was created to anger you: . http://www.debate.org... By making a conclusion from this "evidence", I would assume that more things such as reading a debate containing 80,000 characters would either give you a headache or make you angry. (2) "A five round debate typically requires a huge sacrifice, especially considering many debate. org users are honors/AP students. " It depends on how much do they type. They'll wouldn't be forced to type 8000 characters every round. Most people post less characters even though they have a lot of characters remaining. Five-round debates allow more rebuttals and more points to be presented. . http://www.debate.org... In this debate, the main reason why JBlake lost was because he didn't get to refute any Con's arguments. The more rounds a debate has, the more points that could be addressed. There is almost always a winner and loser to a debate. The winner and loser to the debate could be more easily decided in five rounds than three rounds. There could always be a chance that one side could give in when that debater has no more rebuttals to present. In three rounds, people would be less likely to give up assuming that they have a strong case for debates. (3) Debaters should follow a strict structural outline. According to . http://www.debate.org..., "All debates should follow a strategy or outline. Before you write your response create an outline or even a few bullet points to help set up your argument. For even better clarity, write your entire argument in a word processing program then copy and paste it onto Debate. org! Debating is like chess, a strategy is needed. Try to impress your audience. " Debaters may not always used the outline I proposed, but they can use a similar outline to help clear arguments. This applies to any debate, not just five-round debates. ---- Contention 3: For the Webmaster ---- (1) Why waste space when it doesn't need to be wasted? The amount of debates or the length of debates won't affect the webmaster much. Some people choose to post eighty thousand characters. Why should they be limited on how much characters that they can type. For example, I wouldn't be able to type all this if I couldn't post 8,000 characters. Waste or no waste, debates are supposed to be fun and they shouldn't be limited to less than 8,000 characters. "I hope PoeJoe wouldn't think that the the sacrifice of readability is far too great to be able to read my debate. " If these was offensive to you, then I'm sorry. I'm just hoping that my arguments wouldn't be so much a headache to you, considering the amount of characters I'm typing. ---- Conclusion ---- I also look forward to your R3.