MOD ANNOUNCEMENT: Member Debates (Input needed)

Discussion in 'Debates & Contests' started by E_Pluribus_Venom, Jul 5, 2011.

  1. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    That's spunk, I admit.:sun:
    Not sure why we can't discuss this without the insinuations though.
    As far as I understand, everything here is voluntary, rep board, discussion boards, posts, everything, even the proposed discussion format.
    Who are we to judge who has fun doing what? Isn't it supposed to be fun, not a second job, not a world changing experience of sorts?
    If people want to have a serious discussion, let them. (that goes for those opposed to the idea)
    If people want to just read, let them.
    If people want to rep all day, let them.
    If people want to play games, let them.
    Doesn't cost us any extra.
    Do we win nailing those we disagree with to the wall, and if so, what is it that we win?
    Or is it rather that we lose a piece of ourselves doing so?
     
  2. frodly

    frodly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,989
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83

    :giggle: Delusions really are amusing sometimes!!
     
  3. Viv

    Viv Banned by Request

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    8,174
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I will if I want, but I may not bother. :ignore:

    Feminazi is in your head, btw.

    Hold on until I call all my friends into the thread to cover my back because I can't debate you on this important issue by myself in case I lose. Feck, there's a poster posting his own opinion...Must rush...[/sarcasm]

    There are people who are treating it like a military operation, never mind a job. It occurs to me their aim is not to debate, but to dominate and the real preference is to eliminate opposing philosophies from the forum altogether.

    Every time we see a bully or a cheat and let it pass, we lose a piece of the forum.
     
    Inactive928 and (deleted member) like this.
  4. Albert Di Salvo

    Albert Di Salvo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    25,739
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have you ever read Saul Alinsky's Rules For Radicals? It's a manifesto of successful leftist political tactics. The tome has been embraced by many conservatives because the tactics enumerated therein work.
     
  5. liberalminority

    liberalminority Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Messages:
    25,273
    Likes Received:
    1,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes there is a handicap, the majority here has a conservative lean most would agree.

    This would make it so that one liberal is not going against many conservatives.
     
  6. Doug_yvr

    Doug_yvr Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Messages:
    19,096
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So sorry to hear about your lobotomy. Get Well card is in the mail.
     
  7. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    297
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I see plenty of faulty syllogism in here.

    I’m a very intelligent man and I believe A.
    This other person believes B.
    Therefore this other person is a complete moron.
     
  8. Atreides

    Atreides New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2011
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I see you failed to consider the viewpoints of the independents (C or is it 3, or even III), who considers both A & B as moronic.

    I'm helpful like this. No thanks necessary :;):
     
  9. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe that many don't understand "debate" in the context of how it's formally used. It isn't about the topic but instead about the presentation of the arguments. How is the topic addressed, are valid arguments and rebuttals provided, and is supportive documentation for the arguments offered.

    We could take an example of the Earth revolving around the sun for example. While we all know that the Earth revolves around the sun if the proponent of that fails to establish evidence that the Earth is revolving around the sun while the opponent demonstates that the sun rises in the East and sets in the West then the opponent would win the debate.

    The moderators are working on judging criteria based upon formal debate and we will share that once we hammer out some of the details. In the end the topic itself shouldn't really matter and certainly the debate itself cannot be judges based upon the topic but instead on how the members address the topic in the debate. The best debates often require the participants to switch sides in the middle but that might be too challenging for most.
     
  10. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I have every confidence that these criteria will manifest no higher priority than to ensure that form is held in higher esteem than substance, and that emotionalized ninnies are not driven to tears.
     
  11. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In a debate both form and substance have value. One thing that we want to ensure is that the topic is not the foundation for judgment. Debates are not about the topic per se but instead its about how the individual presents their arguments related to the topic.

    In the mod forums where we're discussing this I brought up the example of whether the earth circles the sun or if the sun circles the earth. If the proponent of the earth revolving around the sun only offers opinion but the proponent of the sun revolving around the sun provides not only opinions but also supportive evidence that the sun rises in the East, travels across the sky and sets in the West then the proponent of the sun revolving around the earth would win the debate.

    On the flip side a well established logical argument can overcome apparent evidence to the contrary. In the end it is all about how the arguments are presented and not whether one side is right or wrong related to the topic of the debate. Who provided the most compelling argument?
     

Share This Page