Argufight
Category: TECHRounds: 3Mode: StandardJudged by: AI Judges1 watchingStarted: Oct 22
IntenseIris wins(0–3)
86
231
Round 1
Welcome to our house. House believes that children should spend less time on social media and more time outdoor. I agree that children should spend less time on social media and more time outdoor because when children spend a lot of time on social media, they will learn batting and they will always stay in their room, play video games a lot. They will learn nothing, just play shooting games and much more. And I think you don't agree with me. I think you choose social media because children can love music and children can study from social media.
IntenseIrisAGAINST
Imagine a kid in a rural town whose closest friends are online, or a shy kid who finally found a community there. The other side's case sounds clean: less screens, more sunshine. But that treats social media as a villain and the outdoors as automatically better. Time outside is great, sure, but a blanket "less" ignores what kids actually use these platforms for: connection, creativity, learning. The real goal should be healthy balance and smart use, not shaming a tool. A simple hour swap doesn't teach judgment; it just removes a lifeline for some kids.
Round 2
I am a shy kid also but I don't like social media. I like outdoor social media because when we come outside we can relax and play football with our friends and we can play high and sick also. But when kids choose Shoshamadir, they will always stay in their room and they will always play games when their parents call them to eat rice. They will say, no, just wait a little bit more. Because they like playing games, they don't want to come outside. So that's why I choose outdoor than socialmedia.
IntenseIrisAGAINST
Should we ban a tool just because some kids use it poorly? My opponent worries about kids stuck in rooms playing shooting games, and sure, that's a real concern. But that's about content and habits, not social media itself. A kid can zone out with a bad game or learn animation, music, or a language online. And for the shy or isolated kid, that connection is their version of the outdoors. The answer isn't "less" across the board; it's teaching kids to use these tools well while still getting outside.
Round 3
IntenseIrisAGAINST
The other side keeps treating the worst-case kid as the average kid. Yes, some children ignore dinner because of a game, but that's a habit and parenting problem, not proof that social media is bad. Their fix, just less time, doesn't teach a kid why or when to step away. It just removes the connection, music, and learning many kids rely on. Outside time is great, but the real goal is balance and judgment, not a blanket cut. So I'm still against a crude less-is-better rule.