Fight Club Pub.

Congratulations TheVagabond

For the very first time in the DebateForum, I really dont get it though. I was 100% I had won this one.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Congrats to The Vagabond and to you for a terrific debate.

And Sky, we've all had at least one of those where we were sure we won but it doesn't turn out that way.





[edit on 11 Feb 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by MemoryShock


Nah - I'm just doing a bit of smack talking

Incredible debate between 2 heavyweights

Thanks for the link - even though I had it already

This should be a great tourney

reply to post by Skyfloating


I thought vagabond had the rhetorical edge, even though there was a lot to be said for your points.

IMO of course

Congratulations to TheVagabond, and thanks to both Sky and Vag for a great (and very relevant) fight.

The fifth Judge ruled against me because:

Also, Skyfloating spent time trying to show us how dangerous Wiki is.

Whichever one of you did that fifth judgement, allow me to say: Thats what I was supposed to be arguing.

reply to post by Skyfloating




I've just been saying about wiki in this thread

Seems to me that given the evidence, I would neither trust nor distrust - but it might point me in the right direction

Im actually a Wikipedia-Fan, so a win for TheVagabond is - from that perspective - also a win for me.

reply to post by budski


On the wikipedia topic, with no implication on debate judging cause I'm gonna stay well out of that mire, I agree.

When I was in school, we weren't allowed to use the Encyclopedia Britannica as a source either. But that didn't mean it wasn't the first place I looked to familiarize myself with the overall picture.

And the "history" and "discussion" features of Wikipedia are (in my opinion) an incredible resource for not just getting the lay of the land, but also pointers toward dissenting opinions.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Hey look at it this way, if the seedings stay as is, you don't have to take on Mike Singh on the opening round.

Updated Roster For The First Tournament Of 2009*
-----------------------------------------------------
The Vagabond 20
Skyfloating 16
TruthWithin 14
chissler 13
Ian McLean 12
Maxmars 8
americandingbat 7
Heike 6 (possible 4/8- Orange-light)
Esdad71 6
maria_stardust 4
whatukno 4
44soulslayer 4
nyk537 4
orange_light 3 (possible 1/5- Heike)
schrodingers dog 2
enjoies05 2
TheWayISeeIt 2
OzWeatherman 2
wormwood13 2
budski 1
TheMythLives (possible 1- peacejet)
questioningall (possible 2-neformore)
neformore (possible 2- questioningall)
antar (possible 2- frankidealist35)
Frankidealist35 (possible 2- antar)
Benarius (possible 2- skeptic1)
Doomsday2029
branh03
Anti - Government
one_man24
visible_villain
Mike Singh

Standbys
---------------------------------------------
lugarock
Grambler
kryties
supercertari
spliff4020
constantwonder

Sky - a really tough debate to judge and one I anticipated as being so. Hence the increased judging. Truly an incredible debate. I personally was dreading the posting of a judgment on that either way...

I'll expect more of the same ("A Game") from you in the tournament...

Skeptic1, I just noticed that Benarius still hasn't resurfaced

If you haven't heard from him by u2u either, I would go ahead and post your next reply if it were me.

Your call, of course, but I thought I'd mention it since I was anti-posting yesterday

reply to post by budski


Just noticed your use of that in the thread.

All in all Wiki is just as good or bad a source as any other, I guess.

That one was pretty nerve racking to wait out. I knew plenty of people would read the debate more or less as the first judge did, and I really can't hold it against them because this time out they weren't the ones I was trying to convince. My opponent had the simpler, more organized, and pretty much the more attractive argument in some ways, and I took the gambit of standing by my mistakes rather than draw attention to them by changing. I could have made it closer in those respects but I didn't think I was going to outdo skyfloating that way. I figured it was go for a dirty win and get it or go for a clean win and lose.

So basically I fell back on volume, passion, and snipes, and hoped like hell that the criteria the judges chose would match well with my approach. It did so I won by a little, but if it hadn't I would have lost by a lot. We just as easily could have had a whole panel that saw things the way the first judge did.

I had quite a bit to worry about in this one- skyfloating did a bang up job.

reply to post by Skyfloating


I HATE that feeling and know it well.

I should challenge Mike and throw the debate to raise his seed.

Anagram, Schmanagram. Mine are coming out of my head, not off some website.

Heike (Hy' kah): What the Mafia's football team says after the count.

Orange light: That round thing in the sky, after the supervolcano erupts.

Skyfloating: Those few precious and incredible moments of bliss which come between "Jump!" and "Dammit! I KNOW I had a parachute here..."

Memory Shock: The moment after you recognize that old geezer with no teeth as one of your high school classmates.

Vagabond: The feeling that one is bonded to vagary and is therefore required to be unpredictable, wild, and unusual.

Ian Ma Clean: The rightful heir to the Mr. Clean fortune and reputation.

reply to post by americandingbat


Not yet. I spoke with Semperfortis via u2u about it and I will give Benarius until tomorrow afternoon. If nothing then, I will go ahead and post my closing......then, we'll see what happens.

Congratulations to you both. I only had enough money to buy one prize so you will have to debate as to who gets it ...

This is the new Dewalt Nail Gun, now you can simply kick back in the comfort of your barstool here at the pub and fix your fence across the road.

reply to post by antar


Now, that thing could do some damage.

....SDog's multiple personality disorder is giving me a headache today....so many avatars in such little time....