Appeal: appeal to popularity
From HEATED Debate w/ Feminists. Wage Gap, Pro Choice ft. @MikeRashidOfficial.
- #20843:03:16upheld Myron Gaines psogos: appeal to popularity (+1)
The council upheld the call: Myron Gaines gave away 1 point.
“There's a reason why we got almost 10,000 people watching us at 02:00 in the morning. It's because we're speaking for a silent majority of men that can't say this stuff.”
Diogenes: Kimberly asks how he knows what women think. He offers his viewer count as support for his claims about women.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Myron's opening and consistently held stance is that his claims about intersexual dynamics are fact-based rather than opinion, typically backed by unnamed studies or authority figures rather than citable data; here he substitutes audience size for evidence in response to Kimberly's "how do you know" challenge, which is the same evidentiary shortcut, not a new departure. Myron's declared method throughout is to prop up sweeping claims about women with something other than direct argument—unnamed studies, named authorities (Jordan Peterson), or now sheer audience size—substituting a headcount for evidence that his generalization about women's inner life is correct. That is a clean instance of appeal to popularity, and it continues rather than departs from his established pattern (already upheld at 99:14 and 142:51 for the same move).
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "appeal to popularity". Answering Kimberly's live challenge about why women supposedly can't handle "masculine problems," Myron offers the show's late-night viewer count as if it were evidence that his claims are true ("we're speaking for a silent majority of men"). Audience size shows the show is popular, not that the substantive claim is correct; this is the same move already flagged at 134:54 (viewer count as proof men have a "reproductive problem"), repeated here to dodge Kimberly's actual question.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Myron's declared framework throughout the debate is that he argues from checkable "facts" and studies rather than feelings or crowd sentiment (a claim this bench has repeatedly tested and often found him falling short of, per 142:51, 155:19 already upheld as appeal to popularity/authority); here, pressed twice by Kimberly on how he knows what women think, he answers first with a genuine (if unevidenced) explicit-argument move about differing life experience, then caps it by pointing to the ~10,000 viewers as the reason ("It's because we're speaking for a silent majority of men") his claims should be credited, substituting audience size for evidence of truth. The quoted line does what the label says: it offers the show's popularity/viewer count as validation that his claims about women and men are correct, rather than as evidence bearing on the actual question of how he knows what women think — the same move already found on this record at 142:51 and 155:19. It is a supplementary rhetorical flourish rather than his whole answer (he also gave a substantive if unevidenced explicit argument moments earlier), so it scores as a minor instance, consistent with the referee's severity.
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.