It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Winston Smith is a very good writer. Very sexy. But he was all flair, no facts. His F-17 never left the runway.
In terms of Winston's argument, every point was refuted by facts, however strong, from Mycroft. Winston didn't even cite one reference! I found Mycroft's evidence of the damaging organ trade in China to be particularly damning. He also has a good statistical point that there are to few executed prisoners to make a difference.
On a literary level Mycroft couldn't touch Winston. I noticed he tried to "adapt" Winston's wit and style. In the future I would suggest Mycroft stick to penetrating facts and fatal (in this case) analysis. He's a solid debater, from all appearences, and shouldn't worry about flash and bang.
Comments: This debate is especially difficult to judge. Given my druthers it would be a "draw" as both contenders fell victim to topic transferance, emotional appeals and personal attacks on occassion, while the topic itself remained stalled. However, absent the option of voting 'draw' I credit Mycroft with slightly more external preperation, and thus success.
"While Winston's arguments seem pretty solid in the end I think they are flawed at best. Mycroft made the best argument by just using common sense. Mycroft gets my vote here."
My goodness, I would have paid money to actually HEAR Winston Smith in this debate. He is so articulate and it would have been wonderful to hear him speak his written words.
However, Mycroft made a much better argument. In fact, I was in favor of this subject before the debate and now have a different opinion. Mycroft did such an outstanding job against a worthy opponant.
Congrats to both on an intelligent and respectful debate.