Having bad table manners makes you a less liked person.

Against Overview: Okay the point I'm trying to make is that the point of a debate round is to have a conversation about the topic at hand and I believe as part of that, it means that you don't undermine your opponent. But Zakkuchan did that many times in his first speech, especially in the OA when he undermines my intelligence. The reason I bring up the abuse is because I wish that Zakkuchan could've actually debated the resolution, rather than trying to throw up smoke screens, such as the all countries thing, but I'll discuss that shortly. I: Wording A: Bad can be defined as not proper, out of order, or not suitable. Funk also defines it as wrong, not good. Seeing that the basis of inappropriate from the fusion definition of bad + table manners comes from the word bad, it would appear that bad is inappropriate. So that makes my arguments still uphold because if you do have inappropriate behavior at a table, you have bad table manners, and I do believe you will be less liked. C: You don't have to dig that deep to find that the definition of human is expected to live in a civilized way. That is why my definition still upholds. I thank my opponent for offering a source, but I believe that my definition is still the one you must accept as it is more detailed and it is right on with what a human is, cause I mean it's what makes us separated from other species, the fact that we should act in civilized way that is. II: Examples I provide why in my case many different reasons why the resolution should be upheld. This includes the examples. The examples don't make my case, but they show bad table manners (in this culture, cause I can't do every culture…. etc. ), will make you a less liked person. I show why that in real life if you in fact have bad table manners, that people will just naturally not like you as much. I think we need to use some common sense when it comes to deciding whether or not this resolution should be voted pro or con. And I believe that if someone does something inappropriate while eating, like my examples show, that you will like them less to some degree, and therefore the resolution most be voted in favor of pro. III: Study My opponent makes many hasty generalizations, which is part of the reason he is being abusive, but the fact of the matter is that this study is still great to use for the round. For a few reasons, because 1) It shows in a real world circumstance, which my opponent has not presented any early evidence about the real world, and if he does it's unfair to me because I can't refute it, and 2) this evidence proves the resolution correct, because people had bad table manners, and people less liked them…whether it's a little less liking of, or hatred towards, it's still a less liking. 3) Don't buy my opponent's claim that it has to be all out hatred, because the first impression of bad table manners could be weeks or months into a relationship. I have friends that I have never eaten with, and I dont know if they have bad table manners or not, but if they did, I would like them just a little less, I would still be friends with them, but there would always be that notion that they have bad table manners. IV: RA Inappropriate behavior while dining, that is the definition of bad table manners. I believe if I kill someone at a table that would be viewed as inappropriate behavior while dining at a table. Now, why it may not be common, it still proves the resolution true. Because if I'm dining with my friends, and one of them pulls out a gun and kills one of my other friends, I would like them less. As for his question about who would hate someone for putting a cat on the table, it doesn't have to be hate, just has to be less liked, because that is what the resolution is. And I honestly can say with confidence, that if one of my friends put a cat on a table, that I might like them less. V: OA and Overview I will provide why all of my points are resolutional, though I believe I've already proven this and my opponent is just wasting time by throwing up this smoke screens to try to take attention off of the actual debate. My 1st upholds and is resolutional because they are defined words and analysis of the words of the resolution. My 2nd upholds and is resolutional because they are examples about the resolution that show why if you commit table manners such as these commonly accepted bad table manners, people won't like you as much. The resolution implies that you have more than one bad table manner, so that means if you commit many of these you will be less liked. My 3rd upholds and is resolutional because 1) it is the only evidence used in the round and 2) it shows why you will be less liked, because like I explained, even if you know someone, your first impression of their table manners could make you like them less. 3) even if you haven't meet them, you can still like them less. My 4th upholds and is resolutional because if you have inappropriate behavior at a table, you have bad table manners. Killing someone while dining would be inappropriate behavior while at a table. And you can read the rest of the reasoning for this contention and all the others above and throughout my case, but lets move to his. I: Cultures A: I've shown why my examples, are that, examples of why people would like you less. I offer many that show why you would be less liked. I show why in general people would be less liked because of table manners because the reason inappropriate or bad behavior becomes inappropriate or bad behavior is because people don't accept it as good. My opponent agrees that there are such things as bad table manners, and because he does, I essentially win because people don't generally accept bad behavior, and if they did, it wouldn't be bad behavior. B: My opponent keeps on throwing out the word hate, when I only used it in one point, but it doesn't have to be hate, just less liked. Anyways, If you go in a region that has certain table manners that they expect you to have you and you don't have the proper table manners, then the people that you dine with you there will inevitably like you less. Just like if it's okay to wear hats in school A, and then you go to school B, and they don't allow hats to be worn, if you wear a hat there you will be in trouble. It's breaking the standard that is expected of you in that region. II: Again, it's not all out hate, it's just less liked. Anyways, look to where I just attacked his 1:A. Something bad or inappropriate implies that a majority of people don't accept it. That it is why, because if you have bad table manners, a majority of people will like you less, whether by a little, a lot, or somewhere in the middle, a majority of people will like you less. Moving on to the Voting Issues. I've given indepth analysis of why my case upholds and is resolutional just above. And once again I do believe you should accept them and I believe you should vote in favor of them. Then as for the cultural thing, I can't explain every single table manner in every single country, but I have explained why you will be generally disliked because of what I said against his I-A and his II. Please read through the arguments and see why Pro wins. For my final reason as to vote for Pro The real debate comes down to the fact that if you have bad table manners in a region that views your manners as bad, then they will like you less, and this is just by simple human nature and what is viewed as appropriate or inappropriate. This point I make in my final reason is made boldly true against his case in the paragraphs above.