@marisa_noelle thank you for this judgement. I agree it felt really close to me as well, which I think is a testament to my opponents skill because, like you said, my strategy caught him by surprise, but he recovered really well and had some great responses. Thanks for taking the time to analyze both sides here!
@marisa_noelle thanks for the decision. You are right about some of my strategic errors, like not focusing on the advantage of lesser prison time. I probably could have found some information on how longer sentences increase recidivism (it's a complicated issue, however). I do have a question, though. Since I had to face both potentially Daniel's strategy of mandatory castration and a potential stand entirely against any form of castration, what would you have recommended I use as a weighing mechanism?
@ndavidfarley I think the human rights issue was a good example of a weighing mechanism, but con's arguments on the benefits of these drugs was a sufficient response in my opinion. In this particular round, I think you would have benefitted most from using a weighing mechanism related to your argument of choice. For example, you could have won on your original weighing mechanism of safety if you had argued that incentivizing chemical castration + lesser prison sentences would make society better off than mandatory castration with longer prison sentences. Hope that helps!
Great debate guys!@debateme13 Congrats for advancing to the next round!@ndavidfarley Great job as always :-) We just opened registrations for November's tournament:https://www.qallout.com/tournament
@ndavidfarley that was a really solid round. Thank you for that great debate!
@debateme13 yeah It was really good. Thanks for debating me