That the government should provide free internet

Judge: Nerd Politico
Win awarded to: admin1 user rated this judgement as good

Judge: xXCryptoXx
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
The consistent, exponentially better, smart, all-powerful, beautiful, sexy, pretty, cute (but smelly), introverted in feeling, extroverted in thought, most likely judging, maybe a hint of sensing, New Zealance, Atheistic, non-believing, Christian crushing, bangs to long for his forehead, needs a haircut, brown haired (but almost looks black) debater who goes by the almighty, smart, clever, sexy username of Admin, must have won this debate. Whether it be through the Admin’s very destiny, be it through the fear he strikes into the hearts of all debaters, or be it that his opposing debater StevenH could not handle the consistence, beauty and all other great things about Admin that he had to forfeit every round. This being said, Admin has won by forfeit.

Feedback:
Steven H should try to actually post an argument.

---

1 user rated this judgement as biased
1 user rated this judgement as good
2 users rated this judgement as exceptional

Judge: cowboy0108
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
I am going to triple the weight of this debate by adding a whole bunch of characters in this debate. I chose to give the victory to Admin because he did not forfeit any round as opposed to Steve who forfeited EVERY round. This is not good and it shows that he does not value commitment as a person. I think that this is four hundred characters but I am not sure.

Feedback:
My feedback to Admin is to keep up the good work. He continued the debate even after Steve dropped it completely. I know that I hate it when people do it to me, even though I admit to having the same problem sometimes myself, thus I give all the points possible to Admin. If you can't tell from this, I am really really bored and have nothing else to do.
My advice to Steve is to stop accepting debate(or creating them) or just get on the site and do what you are responsible for doing.

---

1 user rated this judgement as exceptional

Judge: Heineken
Win awarded to: cowboy0108
Reasoning:
My vote for Cowboy0108 is based almost exclusively on CON's flagrant concession.
The burden established is that the state should pay people to sterilize themselves.
CON opened his round by establishing definitions which did not suit the burden. The definition of "forced sterilization" is not inferred by the resolution on any level, especially since a literal reading of the topic actually dictates that people sterilize "themselves", rather than the government.
I agree with PRO that CON unfairly shifted the burden of proof and I find his tactic reflecting poor conduct.
I will treat this debate as a forfeiture by the CON, for failing to address PRO's argument and instead establishing a concession, that "free-will" sterilization ought to be provided.
Arguing that "Free-will" sterilization ought to be provided is directly conceding the burden of proof.

Being the first person to create definitions does not mean that those definitions are mutually conceded. It is a straw man of epic proportions to claim: "I have defined the terms and PRO is now obligated to accept them."

Feedback:
PRO walked a dangerous line in his opening round with the statement:"The poorest memebers of society often have the most children. I am not going to go into why, but they do."

As a voter, I am quite interested in knowing WHY PRO assumes that poverty and excessive reproduction are directly proportional. Such a premise is central to the topic.
There was technically no reason for me to assume that sterilization is for poor people only.

Overall, I felt this debate was a bit lazy.

---

1 user rated this judgement as exceptional

Judge: TheAntidoter
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
I'm sorry that this didn't work out, it would have been a pleasure to judge this, but I still think that this was a great debate.

Good job Admin, and I hope that this works out next time.

Maybe an Increase in time, Maybe?

---

1 user rated this judgement as exceptional

Judge: KingDebater
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
I'd like to talk to you about the reason of debate. Why we debate, and much much more. We debate so we can exchange ideas and arguments, and the weight of said things determines the winner of the debate. One person in the debate (I won't name names so he isn't embarrassed)exchanged NO ideas at all, and so something is greater than nothing, thus making admin the winner/

Feedback:
That person (he knows who he is!) should post some arguments.

---

1 user rated this judgement as exceptional

Judge: BigAl95
Win awarded to: admin1 user rated this judgement as good