Appeal: false claim
From HEATED Debate w/ Feminists. Wage Gap, Pro Choice ft. @MikeRashidOfficial.
- #20201:47:05upheld Myron Gaines claim: false claim (+1)
The council upheld the finding: Myron Gaines gave away 1 point on Alētheia, the tally of checked facts.
The claim, as Thucydides noted it: Tinder studies show that women find 88% or more of men unattractive or below average attractiveness.
Diogenes: Thucydides (verifier): misattributed. No "Tinder study" reports 88% of men rated unattractive or below average; the widely-cited figure of women rating roughly 80% of men "below average" comes from Christian Rudder's 2009 OkCupid data analysis, a different platform entirely, as SwipeStats.io itself notes in correcting this common conflation. Real Tinder data shows women swipe right on about 12% of male profiles (implying an ~88% rejection rate), but a swipe-left is not the same as an explicit "unattractive/below average" rating, and no single Tinder study states the figure Myron gives. The claim thus blends an OkCupid rating study with Tinder swipe-behavior data under the wrong label.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Myron's declared and consistently held method throughout the debate is to dress generalizations as "fact-based" and "studies show" rather than opinion (as in the repeated unnamed-authority pattern already upheld at 32:29, 51:48, and 87:20); this line continues that pattern by naming a specific study to back the figure. The verifier's finding is misattribution: the ~88% figure is not from any "Tinder study" but conflates a 2009 OkCupid rating analysis with separate Tinder swipe-rate data. Because Myron named the specific (wrong) source to lend it credibility rather than simply asserting the number, the wrong name was doing the work, which the rubric directs to appeal to authority rather than false claim.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found "evidence". This is the specific data point delivered as part of the same answer already credited at 107:02: pressed by Isla for a source, Myron names an actual checkable category of research (Tinder/dating-app attractiveness-rating studies) and gives the specific figure it produced, rather than repeating a bare "studies show" gesture with nothing behind it.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Myron's declared framework throughout is to present sweeping claims as settled "fact" backed by studies, often unnamed or loosely cited (as in the 51:48 and 85:13 lines already on this record), and this Tinder-attribution line is a continuation of that same pattern of casual sourcing rather than a one-off. Thucydides's check finds the figure misattributed — the "88% of men rated below average" statistic traces to Christian Rudder's 2009 OkCupid analysis, not any Tinder study, though actual Tinder swipe-rate data independently shows a similar ~88% rejection rate. Per the misattribution rule, the false-claim finding stands and the source is corrected on the record; nothing indicates "Tinder" specifically (rather than "studies" generally) was doing persuasive work here, so no additional appeal-to-authority point is warranted.
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.