Appeal: concession
From Religion Debate: Islam vs Christianity.
- #11563:04:59upheld Daniel Haqiqatjou epainos: concession (+1)
The council upheld the call: Daniel Haqiqatjou earned 1 point.
“… even Jay could not condemn Thomas Aquinas as a pedophile. He condemns him by the way. He condemns him, but he doesn't say that he's a pedophile.”
Diogenes: He corrects his own accusation in mid-sentence and grants that Jay did condemn Aquinas, narrowing the charge to the wording rather than repeating the false version.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S2 had made the broader, false claim earlier in the debate; here he walks it back to a narrower, more defensible version after being contradicted, which is a real concession rather than a repetition of the earlier error. After Jay's protest at 160:41 ("I explicitly said I don't have a problem condemning Aquinas"), Daniel here revises his earlier flagrant claim ("Jay refuses to condemn... down with pedophilia") by explicitly granting "He condemns him" and narrowing the charge to a semantic point (not using the word "pedophile"). This is a genuine, if partial, concession correcting an earlier overstated claim under challenge.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "concession". This is a more accurate restatement than Daniel's earlier framing (at 160:29) that Jay "refuses to condemn Thomas Aquinas" outright; here Daniel correctly acknowledges "He condemns him... but he doesn't say that he's a pedophile," which matches what Jay actually said and walks back the more sweeping earlier accusation that Jay and Sam are simply "down with pedophilia."
- Plato uphold: On the record: S2 had earlier flatly claimed Jay "refuses to condemn" Aquinas as a pedophile despite Jay's explicit condemnation moments before; here he partially corrects that overstatement, acknowledging Jay did condemn Aquinas while narrowing his complaint to the specific wording, which is a genuine (if partial) concession improving accuracy over his earlier claim. Acknowledging mid-argument that the opponent did in fact condemn the practice, rather than repeating the earlier flatly false claim, is a real concession that corrects the record rather than compounding the misrepresentation.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.