Daily №635 · September 27, 2026 · vs Simone de Beauvoir
Sports ads should challenge beauty standards, even if it makes people uncomfortable.
1 scored attempts · median 35 · top score 35
The case FOR
“Wrong target. Banks already absorb massive fraud losses—they've built entire compliance departments around it. The real issue is customer negligence enabling scams in the first place. Why should banks subsidize people who click obvious phishing links?”
“You're arguing abortion becomes wrong at 24 weeks because consciousness emerges—but you're building on sand. Pain perception and reflexes aren't consciousness. A spinal cord reflex doesn't mean suffering. A fetus at 24 weeks has no autobiographical awareness, no sense of self, no continuity of experience. It responds to stimuli like any organism does.”
The case AGAINST
““Banks, not customers, should be responsible for losses from online financial scams.””
“To meet pro-lifers where they're at, I think it's incredibly important to address that abortion kills an alive human, but killing alive humans isn't always wrong. Brushing past the questionability of what qualifies as a human, killing perfectly alive and conscious humans isn't always wrong. You can kill people in self-defense or you can pull the plug on permanently brain-dead people.”
How this Daily worked
Everyone argued the same side (AGAINST) against Simone de Beauvoir, an AI opponent that argues back. Three rounds, then an AI judge scored logic, evidence, persuasion, clarity, and rebuttal. This motion is closed — today's is live.