View Poll Results: Are you willing to participate in 1 on 1 debates here at PoliticalForum?

178. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    92 51.69%
  • No

    46 25.84%
  • Maybe... Some clarification is needed

    44 24.72%
Multiple Choice Poll.
+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 49 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 490

Thread: PF Debates: Will You Participate?

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shangrila View Post
    Here's my idea for the day.
    Had it over in the judges thread.
    Thanks for it, and I have some input. When this was just an idea back in 2008, the idea was for the debate to have an open poll just like what you've suggested here. I agree that it would encourage a lot more participation, but here's why it wasn't put in the initial idea explanation right off:

    Result without the obligatory/needed explanation. With a simple poll, there's nothing that says I actually read the debate. I could've just looked at two names, and voted for the one I typically agree with, like, or share a social group with. Specific judges offers the requirement that people actually have to explain their vote... possibly via a point system or lengthy explanation. I do understand what you're saying, but having an open poll would only further frustrate the already irritated idea of bias in judging.

  2. Default

    Gotta go play with my son... I should be back later to talk this over some more.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by proof-hunter View Post
    Have some libtards been crying about getting pick on in some of these threads?
    ask yourself one simple question, what the hell is happening to the forum? why
    are we even talking about such a ploy?

    Conservative Judges or Liberal Judges, it's does not matter both are a bad idea to
    either side. And what the hell is the real goal here? I might leave this forum if this goes
    through, this is not what I came here for, to be Judged, nor do I want it going on
    in a public forum to anyone.

    You can't stack the cards right for either side. is this now what this forum is about?
    Just let me know so I can leave.

    good's just an idea for a PART of the forum..just like any other. If you don't want to participate, just don't go there. They aren't talking about remaking the entire board!

    I don't care about international affairs, generally, so I don't go into that section...I don't stomp my feet and say I am leaving if someone starts a thread about Jamaica...

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by E_Pluribus_Venom View Post
    It appears you misunderstood the poll question. The question was will you participate, not an inquiry into whether or not it should happen. This is to get a feel for how frequent we'd be initiating the debates. If anything, we now have a list of people who won't participate... effectively silencing the "but why can't I post in the debate thread if I'm not a participant" complaint. So thank you.

    Thank you to everyone for voicing your valid concerns regarding the voting process. I must reiterate that what's been suggested so far isn't what we've decided on, and if a particular portion of the process is unpopular (as judging apparently is) then we'll scrap it for something better... and we have no problem doing so. Once more, for those interested... we're open to suggestions regarding a potential judging process.

    As far as scrapping the debates all together, it's not likely. The claims of mass renovations to the operation of the forum aren't legitimate complaints, as a number of options are still open to forum members (not outside the normal scope of day to day business). This is an idea that wouldn't see the light of the feedback section without first meeting the approval of the mod panel, rendering claims of this being a lone move quite inaccurate.
    while I am not feeling all that confident enough to be either a debater OR a judge; I would LOVE to read the debates...if they are as I envision, simple arguments with facts and such to back them up...

    and if it is a topic I dont' care about then I will just go read some other section.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paco View Post
    Cowards. This is an open, public forum. If you can't handle the heat, then (*)(*)(*)(*) of the kitchen!
    i'm here for dialog, not two competing monologues.
    What you have whispered to someone behind closed doors will be shouted from the rooftops.
    Do you want to live in Flint or Detroit but don't want the hassle of relocating? Keep voting for Democrats, and they will move to you.

  6. Default

    Its nice to see the hive mind has come to a consensus on this issue. Originally I thought, who cares? You know what, I still think that. There is absolutely positively no reason that this idea has brought about so much anxiety among right wingers. I don't understand it at all. They are portraying this as if it is a left-wing conspiracy to drown out their irreplaceable voices.

    A couple of things. Why does anyone care? If you don't want to participate don't participate. People are pretending as if this will be the new standard for the entire forum, instead of one small part of the forum possibly down at the bottom with the contests section(has anyone actually opened that?).

    Next thing, I don't understand how this became a right wing vs left wing issue. In fact some right wingers initially said they supported it, until they saw left wingers do and that the hive did not. They then changed their position to align with the hive. Seriously, what is the problem with this. I don't have a problem with judging as a concept, judged debates happen all the time outside of the internet. You are judged by your ability to make and defend an argument every time you write a college paper. Do you refuse to go to college because people put a letter grade on your intellectual ability? I suppose it is a little restrictive, but the hesitance to be judged doesn't make sense to me. Is it insecurity? People don't think they can hold up?

    Last of all, all the right wingers seem to be upset that this is somehow elitist. Of course anyone can join in, but I suppose because there is a winner and a loser that is elitist? Do you want everyone to just get participation ribbons? I thought you guys loved competition? I thought you derided us liberals for always trying to avoid judging people(most liberals aren't like that, but that is a story for another thread). Now all of a sudden we should have no judgment. "No one can tell ME if my posts/arguments are good or not!!" Seriously why is this bothering people so much? It intrigues me and confuses me at the same time. Is it as simple as that liberals like it? Are you all so predictable? If so, that would be sad.

    PS. I have objections to the judging as well. Not judging in principle, which doesn't bother me, but how it will actually work in practice. I don't see which members of this forum could be unbiased. A few I can think of could be unbiased on certain issues, but almost everyone here is totally convinced of their correctness(even the people who are totally clueless) on every single issue, and would inevitably just pick based on preconceived notions. Similarly I think opening it to a poll makes that issue magnify exponentially. It would just be a popularity contest, and that would be silly. Especially since we already have a popularity contest where people are judged not based on their quality of posts but on their willingness to be ideologically unwavering. It is called the reputation system!!!
    Im a Tarte, what! you want some of this!

    The essence of any utopianism is: Conjure an ideal that makes an impossible demand on reality, then announce that, until the demand is met in full, your ideal can't be fairly evaluated. Attribute any incidental successes to the halfway meeting of the demand, any failure to the halfway still to go.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flounder View Post
    This thing speaks for itself..~~~~~ There is hardly any interest, and no conservatives to debate,,,it's over. Hey,,you guys can give yourself a trophy anyway.

    For the worst idea of the year.......

    As is stated earlier, what is there to debate? Liberalism, or Progressivism is Anti-Constitutional rhetoric. Progressives wish to progress away from the Constitution, and violate unalienable Liberty, and property rights. Their philosophy only took root in this society after FDR threatened the Supreme Court so they would stop ruling his "New Deal" unconstitutional. The Progressive political philosophy is illegitimate as it seeks to violate the law. What, we are to debate, the fact and some will argue that violations are “good?” Not in this LIFE! How can something be discussed as a true option when it is lawless and illegitimate? The only place such folly has traction and gravitas is in the delusional Liberal or Progressive mind...
    "And lord I can't make any changes
    All I can do is write em in a song"

  8. #38


    Who cares. The liberals are generally better debaters anyways. Just pick topics that aren't hyper partisan and the wingnut hive can sit around and sulk or whatever.

  9. #39


    Or, here is another idea. Require that people take the opposite side from what they actually are. Make the liberal defend the conservative position and vice versa.

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FactChecker View Post
    Others have volunteered to be judges as well. The mods have quite specifically stated that if a debater objects to a judge, another will be chosen. For example, if you are a debater, and Teamosil is set to be one of your judges, a mod will inform you. You would then state that you do not want him to be a judge, then they suggest a different judge. It seems like a mechanism is already built in to take care of your (very valid, in my opinion) concerns.

    Teamosil is a fantastic poster. I lose all respect for anyone who would ever consider him a troll. There are DEFINITELY trolls on the left, and they are not lacking in numbers, but Teamo is not one of them. People who think he is, are either ill-informed, trolls themselves, or complete morons!!
    Im a Tarte, what! you want some of this!

    The essence of any utopianism is: Conjure an ideal that makes an impossible demand on reality, then announce that, until the demand is met in full, your ideal can't be fairly evaluated. Attribute any incidental successes to the halfway meeting of the demand, any failure to the halfway still to go.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 49 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread