One on One debate sign up sheet

[GhostWriter16]

Ghostwriter, nothing personal but I don't think you're up to the task. Don't feel bad, I'm not qualified either, but I'd really like to keep these threads enjoyable for me to read by excluding all those except the primo debaters on the forum. So far, we've got a few good ones in there (and frankly even though I disagree with Cheezy on things, I kind of expect him to wipe the floor with whoever he goes up against.)

Honestly, after thinking about it, I agree with you. I'd rather someone who's better qualified do it. I kinda wanted to get things moving but it would be better to wait for someone who is more qualified than I am.

Also, I'm 17. I hardly feel bad about being underqualified

 

[useless]

it never stopped you in the past so why let it now

 

[GhostWriter16]

it never stopped you in the past so why let it now

VRWC has a legitimate point about letting "Skilled" debaters do these threads. Although I think a thread with two somewhat less skilled debaters might also be interested, Cheezy the Whiz is clearly a VERY qualified devbater, where I am at best a moderately skilled debater. (I don't necessarily give all of my effort here either.) I'm better in real life, but I imagine Cheezy would still wipe the floor with me IRL, no contest. So a debate between me and him would be boring for any spectators because I'd get the floor wiped with me. Would that be an entertaining debate to watch? It might be for everyone who wants to see me get squashed, but since I'm hardly denying that that is what would happen, I understand fully why VRWC doesn't see the point. I don't either.

Having an opinion, informally debating, and formally debating are three very different things, and require different levels of skill.

 

[innonimatu]

If these go well, I'd like to add an EU-focused topic

And if that one has an anti-EU position I'll be interested!

 

[LucyDuke]

It's been suggested we use fiftychat to discuss rules. U on that?

There are two web clients in the link in my sig. No downloads or registration or anything like that is necessary.

 

[Leoreth]

And if that one has an anti-EU position I'll be interested!

Doesn't have to be about the EU itself. How about the classic: Turkey, yay or nay?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

There are two web clients in the link in my sig. No downloads or registration or anything like that is necessary.

You want people to discuss these rules in fiftychat? A standard set of rules should be agreed on in Site Feedback. Just to keep things fair and open for everybody, and so the moderators can chime in on what shenanigans they are and are not prepared to step in on.

Domination3000/GhostWriter16 (please change your name back; we all know and think of you with the first name): There is a saying that "practice makes perfect." Well, I don't believe that anything is perfect, but practice certainly makes improvement. There's no reason you shouldn't participate as a debater, but perhaps in one where you haven't already posted so much that we could all recite your posts in our sleep, hm? Just a bit of encouragement intended here...

 

[bhsup]

You want people to discuss these rules in fiftychat? A standard set of rules should be agreed on in Site Feedback. Just to keep things fair and open for everybody, and so the moderators can chime in on what shenanigans they are and are not prepared to step in on.

It wasn't intended to be some sort of subterfuge to hide rule making. Warpus had mentioned to Hobbsyoyo that they should chat somewhere live like an IM to iron out the details of their debate. I simply PM'd them both and suggested fiftychat because 1) it is live conversation 2) accessible via web 3) full of fun loving people.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Domination3000/GhostWriter16 (please change your name back; we all know and think of you with the first name):

Should I really bother with havingt them change it back? As a mod, would you know how much work that is? (People have called me "Domination" or some variant thereof often enough...)

 

[LucyDuke]

You want people to discuss these rules in fiftychat? A standard set of rules should be agreed on in Site Feedback. Just to keep things fair and open for everybody, and so the moderators can chime in on what shenanigans they are and are not prepared to step in on.

They were talking about instant messaging. What's wrong with #fiftychat?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

It wasn't intended to be some sort of subterfuge to hide rule making. Warpus had mentioned to Hobbsyoyo that they should chat somewhere live like an IM to iron out the details of their debate. I simply PM'd them both and suggested fiftychat because 1) it is live conversation 2) accessible via web 3) full of fun loving people.

My point is that privately negotiating rules isn't fair to everyone else. If this is going to work, the rules have to be standardized and apply to EVERYONE. Working out scheduling is different, and the rules wouldn't be compromised if the participants want to confer about what days would be best for them. But the basic rules need to be applicable to all.

Hey, I'm a fun-loving person who isn't part of fiftychat!

Should I really bother with havingt them change it back? As a mod, would you know how much work that is? (People have called me "Domination" or some variant thereof often enough...)

Former mod. And no, I honestly don't know how much work that might entail because moderators don't have those accesses. Only the admins can change usernames, and as I understand it, the biggest hurdle to that is waiting until they get around to doing it. My experience with running other forums tells me that it varies from the work of less than a minute to an undertaking so frustrating that I want to say extremely nasty things to the <individuals> who designed the forum software (Zetaboards, I'm looking at you!).

 

[hobbsyoyo]

My point is that privately negotiating rules isn't fair to everyone else. If this is going to work, the rules have to be standardized and apply to EVERYONE. Working out scheduling is different, and the rules wouldn't be compromised if the participants want to confer about what days would be best for them. But the basic rules need to be applicable to all.

I think it's fair for the debators to come up with rules in conjuction with downtown for every debate.

If anything, it lets us exepriment with formats till we hit a winner. It also let us talk about what's a no-no and such for the two of us, since it's us debating.

*The rules will, and should, be posted at the top of the thread.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I think it's fair for the debators to come up with rules in conjuction with downtown for every debate.

If anything, it lets us exepriment with formats till we hit a winner. It also let us talk about what's a no-no and such for the two of us, since it's us debating.

*The rules will, and should, be posted at the top of the thread.

So... one set of debaters will make a rule that Pig Latin is okay, posting images is okay, using smileys is okay, and another set of posters may want none of those and you think it's ALL okay?

Is this a serious attempt to establish something new and challenging for the forum, or a circus?

Honestly, I've seen numerous debates (and participated in them) and they all had standard rules. And they were NOT boring. It was fascinating to watch people think on their feet, using their research and notes as guides, as well as their own logic skills, to counter the other team's arguments.

And I repeat: The moderators will be more friendly to this if there are standard rules that let them know when somebody has seriously overstepped. You can't have something allowed in one but forbidden in the next.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

So... one set of debaters will make a rule that Pig Latin is okay, posting images is okay, using smileys is okay, and another set of posters may want none of those and you think it's ALL okay?

Is this a serious attempt to establish something new and challenging for the forum, or a circus?

Honestly, I've seen numerous debates (and participated in them) and they all had standard rules. And they were NOT boring. It was fascinating to watch people think on their feet, using their research and notes as guides, as well as their own logic skills, to counter the other team's arguments.

And I repeat: The moderators will be more friendly to this if there are standard rules that let them know when somebody has seriously overstepped. You can't have something allowed in one but forbidden in the next.

You're being silly. If people are going to be like that, then it will fall apart regardless of the rules. I think you know what I meant.

We need to figure out those standard rules by seeing what works. The rules will be public, and what works will be adopted.

 

[innonimatu]

I'm siding with Valka on that one: why debate the rules in another place?

I mean, we're going to hold debates on the forum because, presumably, we believe a web forum to be a good medium for those. And we're debating the rules for those debates on a different place?! Not a very encouraging start...

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Because as the previous two threads show, we all can't reach a consensus. No one leads these discussions on cfc. We never even got far into a rule discussion as it was constantly derailed. You need two or three heads to get together and come up with something sensible. Open it up to comment for tweaking then role with it.


The rules we are working on are very sensible, and this way, as I said, they can be tweaked as needed. I'll even post the proposed rules here tonight for public discussion

 

[hobbsyoyo]

This also allows the next debators flexibility to tweak things as needed. This is particularly important wrt to time commitments and the like.

 

[Cutlass]

I could take topic #1 from a liberal perspective. But I'll only do it against a serious person.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You're being silly. If people are going to be like that, then it will fall apart regardless of the rules. I think you know what I meant.

We need to figure out those standard rules by seeing what works. The rules will be public, and what works will be adopted.

I most certainly am NOT being "silly." Give me some credit for having seen how these things should work, 'k?

Debates are done by words. Not by visual props. It's not silly to wonder if some sets of opponents here will want to allow the use of smileys or photo memes to help get their opinions across. Other sets of opponents will (rightly, in my opinion) see that as reducing the whole endeavor to trollish levels. Debates are not the same as conversations or chats, and should not be treated with the same casualness as conversations or chats. They are meant to be formal exercises, and deserve formal, standardized rules.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I most certainly am NOT being "silly." Give me some credit for having seen how these things should work, 'k?

Debates are done by words. Not by visual props. It's not silly to wonder if some sets of opponents here will want to allow the use of smileys or photo memes to help get their opinions across. Other sets of opponents will (rightly, in my opinion) see that as reducing the whole endeavor to trollish levels. Debates are not the same as conversations or chats, and should not be treated with the same casualness as conversations or chats. They are meant to be formal exercises, and deserve formal, standardized rules.

I'm saying your sill for assuming that it's going to turn into pig latin smiley ANGRY CAPS debate. I'm not saying you don't know how it should work.

I'm saying that hashing out rules like this don't work even in large committees (I was a politician IRL at one point, no joke) much less an internet forum w/o strict moderation. We are hashing out some sensible rules, that will be up for discussion after the bulk of figuring it all out has been done.

I promise you, this approach will allow everyone to get there say on the rules. If it works, we can either set them in stone, or, allow debaters to work within the framework set by the precedent of the failed or successful first debate. The time constraints are also really important. Some posters are going to want to debate but can't set aside a solid 2-3 hour block to do it. Allowing them the flexibility to set the rules will alleviate this as they will only be debating an opponent who's ok with it.

Also, I hate to repeat myself. But if it goes good, precedent will be set. It'll be set if it fails as well. People are going to thrown in pig latin for giggles and be taken seriously when other debators take it seriously. If they do, the thread should be shut down at the OP, as everyone will see the rules upfront.