The Debate that Matermark lost

Watermarks bitching and moaning

  • No - I thought he would take his defeat with grace and maturity

    Votes: 1 20.0%

  • Yea - I knew he would act like this and show everyone what an emotard he turly is

    Votes: 2 40.0%

  • Yep -But I thought he would at least get over it, the same day

    Votes: 1 20.0%

  • YES - He needs to grow a pair and act like a man

    Votes: 1 20.0%
  • Total voters
    5
U

USFREEDOM911

MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
How many posters anticipated Watermark acting like an emotard and that he would engage in the bitch session, he's currently involved with??
 
wouldn't it be cool if i changed watermarks name to faggot of debate and kept it like that forever?
 
First of all, it was not really a "debate" because the topic was fucked up. The FACT is, life begins at the moment of conception, so Mott's "side" in the "debate" was victorious before any discussions began. Waterhead was ignorant enough to THINK he was in a real debate, and lost. That's what I find most hilarious about the whole thing.

These "debate" topics.... They should be things that aren't established as fact already, otherwise, there is no way to debate them. It reminds me of the time Damo tried to have a "War Room" where debate topics would be posted and people picked sides and went at it... the first topic out of the chute was "Evolution vs. Intelligent Design" ....as if one of these was correct and absolute, and the other wasn't.... as if one of these contradicts the other or renders it impossible! It was a pointless debate topic, which was apropos for that defunct board idea.

You guys should have gotten someone with a few more brain cells to come up with your topics, this would have been much more interesting.
 
Dixie, a formal debate is about proper format and the ability to put together a better argument. You can argue a wrong side, and still win a formal debate.
 
Threedee said:
Dixie, a formal debate is about proper format and the ability to put together a better argument. You can argue a wrong side, and still win a formal debate.
Click to expand...

I"ve seen Softball coaches get an Umpire to reverse his decision, not because the Coach was right; but because of the way he presented it.
 
dixie the one that believes 1/3rd does not exists lectures jpp about getting more brain cells. lol what a retard.
 
Threedee said:
Dixie, a formal debate is about proper format and the ability to put together a better argument. You can argue a wrong side, and still win a formal debate.
Click to expand...

You can't argue against known FACTS! There is NO argumentative point! How can you logically formulate an argument that life begins at any other time after when life is known to begin? It would be like having a debate over when the Declaration of Independence was signed... Mott gets 1776, and Waterhead gets 1895.... who will win that "debate?"

Maybe you people are on a whole different level of stupid than me, but it makes no sense to have a debate over something already known and already a proven fact. There is not anything to debate!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top