One on One Thread Debate Topics, Participants, "House Rules", and more

[Cutlass]

I wouldn't mind participating in this one, either as arguer or observer.

I also wouldn't mind having a discussion/debate with Monsterzuma on monetary policy, debt, money, and the causes of the recession. Yes, that's kind of vague, but I feel like his ideas (what I make of them) and mine are in tension, and I'd love to get that sorted out. Perhaps not soon, but later this year after I've wrapped my head around the core of the MMT/Steve Keen views.

You could always just go back to using the Money thread....

 

[Integral]

Yes, but then I'd have to acknowledge all the posts that I said I'd get to, but never did.

(The money thread is going to my priority list soon, because I'm finally getting a handle on certain financial issues that I wasn't qualified to talk about in the past.)

 

[Cutlass]

Yes, but then I'd have to acknowledge all the posts that I said I'd get to, but never did.

(The money thread is going to my priority list soon, because I'm finally getting a handle on certain financial issues that I wasn't qualified to talk about in the past.)

hee hee

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Proposed Debate Format/Rules

For One on One debates​

Format:
The debaters, having agreed on a topic, will choose three major claims to substantiate their stance on the topic. They do not have to tell each other these claims before the debate begins.

The OP will:
State the Topic
State the Contenders and their respective side of the Topic
State who will post their 3 major claims first
Will list the Format and the Rules

The Second Post will:
Contain the 3 major claims of the Alpha poster

The Third Post will:
Contain the 3 major claims of the Beta poster

After this, the Alpha poster will make a post that contains the major substantiations for their first claims. They may make as many points to back up this claim, they may not substantiate any other claims in this post.

The Beta will then pick one of the points the Alpha made to substantiate their first claim and rebut it. They may not refute any other points, though rebuttals of the claim are implicit in a rebuttal of derivative points, and are allowed. Double Rebuttals are allowed; Tangential Rebuttals are not allowed. The rules on Double and Tangential Rebuttals are global.

The Alpha may then pick one of the rebuttal points of the Beta and refute it with as many points as they wish. They may not refute points the Beta did not raise, nor may they refute a claim made by the Beta.

Example:
Alpha – I claim X, Y, Z
Beta – I claim A, B, C
Alpha – I believe X because 1,2,3
Beta - I refute X (or 1, 2 or 3, but only one of these) because &, *, %
Alpha - I refute % because !, @, #
Beta - I refute 2 and ! together Because ^.

Their will be 4 posts per debater per claim. So, the Alpha will substantiate their first claim and have 3 rebuttals (in alternating order), the Beta will make 4 rebuttals (in alternating order). After all 8 posts have been made on the Alpha's first claim, the Beta will start the cycle over with their first claim and the sequence of posts is reversed.

Debaters may refute the same claim or points if they choose within the same claim set, but must use different points to do so. This is inadvisable as it uses one of the few response posts a debater has within that claim set. Prior claims and points (either positing or rebutting) may not be revisited during subsequent claim set. For example, upon the second claim set, the Alpha may not make a rebuttal that refutes a point or a claim from the first set. The point of this structure is to force the flow of conversation to avoid obsession over tangential arguments. It also forces a debater to carefully word their arguments to withstand attack as they will not be able to defend against every rebuttal.

Rules:
Debaters may not say that they won a claim set or exchange.

Quotes are not allowed.

Sources may be referenced, (i.e. I read in Time Magazine...) but source links may not be provided. The meaning of this is that arguments are assumed to be made in good faith and are factual. These sources may be refuted, but again, this is inadvisable as it wastes a post. The Peanut Gallery is the ultimate arbiter of facts and sources, they will vote on who wins and false sources or claims are to be judged by them.

Pictures and graphs are not allowed.

The debaters and moderator will decide on the time frame for the debate and the allowed time between posts. They may decide that if a post is unanswered for a certain amount of time, the rebuttal is forfeited.

Points of order may be raised by PM with the moderator, they will not be discussed in the thread. If the moderator determines a rule has been violated, they may disqualify a post and post and explanation of the action taken. Moderators have discretion to decide violations and deal out corrective measures.

Points or claims can only be invalidated by a moderator if a rule was broken or format violated (it must be a severe and intentional format violation for a point or claim to be invalidated, rule violations will be decided case by case by the moderator). Points and claims cannot be invalidated for being false.

The Peanut Gallery will vote after the debate has ended on who has won the debate.

Debaters must post in the order provided by this format.

Spelling errors are to be judged to be inconsequential by the Peanut Gallery.

Edits are not allowed – even spelling corrections – to keep the debaters honest.

Debaters should take into account what time zone they and their opponents are in when setting up a debate!


Definitions:
Alpha – First poster in the thread (does not connote seniority or superiority)
Beta – Second poster in the thread (does not connote inferiority) [these were chosen to avoid excessive use of 1st, 2nd, etc.]
Claim - A 'major' point that substantiate the poster's stance on the topic. These are primary arguments.
Claim Set – The cycle of positing, then refuting and defending (alternatively) a single claim.
Double Rebuttal – A single point that refutes multiple (2 or more) points or points and the claim entirely.
Moderator – the person who ensure the format and rules are followed
Peanut Gallery – Observers who will comment in the debate in another thread and will vote after the debate is concluded on which debater won.
Points – These are derivative or secondary arguments used to substantiate or refute a claim.
Tangential Rebuttal – a rebuttal that refutes a claim or a point entirely, but only partially refutes a second point or claim.
Topic – The issue being debated

 

[Earthling]

Well, I officially support having the designated hitter rule as the next official topic on deck. Would be great though not necessary for the participants to be posters with no special expertise or stake in the issue (probably non-Americans) but willing to work with the debate format.

And again as discussion was going in the other thread I like the above rules. I think hobbsyoyo and warpus will set a very good example in their debate. In particular the restrictions on outside links and material should help this debate format and participants on all debate topics should otherwise be contributing in good faith with accurate facts and info. It's fine to say that "batting averages were .abc in 19xx and .efg now." Those are the types of facts that can't be controversial and are easily checked in case of a mistake, but we don't want these one-on-one debates turning into, "Bob said that changing the rules of baseball would result in more revenue." The debate shouldn't be arguing about sources on any topic, whether Bob was a TV executive or baseball commissioner or the response is "Bob's a bad source" or "Charlie said this."

 

[hobbsyoyo]

You made me smile. Someone gets it!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

DEBATE TODAY, 6:30 EST

Today, Warpus and Hobbsyoyo will be squaring off over the subject:

Should more money be spent by NASA on space exploration in this age of economic austerity and tight budgets? Could the money be spent better elsewhere? Space exploration in this case can refer to any NASA project, whether in space or not.

Warpus will take the negative, Hobbsyoyo the affirmative.

Tune in for a great debate, and let's hope this experiment plays out to our liking!

 

[Antilogic]

I suggest the thread titles for the debate, both the thread itself and the peanut gallery thread, conform to the format "1on1 Debate Series #X: Subject" where X is the debate number and Subject is a short descriptor of the topic. The debate moderator should make both the threads and link them in the OPs.

That way, it will be easy to follow as well as find prior debate threads once there are more of these.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I suggest the thread titles for the debate, both the thread itself and the peanut gallery thread, conform to the format "1on1 Debate Series #X: Subject" where X is the debate number and Subject is a short descriptor of the topic. The debate moderator should make both the threads and link them in the OPs.

That way, it will be easy to follow as well as find prior debate threads once there are more of these.

Thoughts downtown?

You want me to make the threads or you?

The only thing is that we both had pictures we wanted to put in the OP, but we could hand those over to you if you want to make the threads.

Up to you.

 

[Quackers]

is this gonna be happening in the tavern?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

is this gonna be happening in the tavern?

Yessir.

 

[Quackers]

have u done your research hobbs? do you feel suitably prepared? are you nervous?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

have u done your research hobbs? do you feel suitably prepared? are you nervous?

I'm training to be an Aerospace engineer with a serious love of all things space. So yeah I feel prepared. I'm not nervous, I'm actually excited and looking forward to it. It's not like anything's really at stake.

Although this is only my second formal debate, so I'm not quite sure what will happen or how it will play out. Before my first debate I prepped intensively and was still nervous.