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

[GhostWriter16]

Did this idea die a violent death today?

No, I'm just waiting to get challenged

 

[JollyRoger]

Some of us don't want to play at Settler level.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Some of us don't want to play at Settler level.

zinga!

 

[LucyDuke]

My point is, and I also address this to Lucy, Camikaze is speaking with his Moderator's Hat, and therefore should not be doing cutesy-pie crap like posting in very small font. I have asked him REPEATEDLY not to do this. That he continues is a blatant show of disrespect. The only other explanation I would accept would be that he is a very forgetful person, which would be a sad thing at his young age.

Well now at least you know how to easily read Cami's comments whether or not he accedes.

I'd say then that the comment threads shouldn't be allowed until AFTER the debate ends. Afterwards you could open a comment thread in order to let people "Judge who won" in a sense.

That's an awful idea, the whole point is parallel commentary. With the whole "opening statement" thing, it's going to be obvious if you really change your angle halfway through, and besides, it takes skill to use any argument effectively.

 

[Camikaze]

@Valka - I apologise for neglecting to have your request of months ago at the forefront of my mind when I made my previous post, and will endeavour to forgo enhanced clarity in my formatting (despite the paragraphs) when posting as a moderator, if I should so remember, in order that you may not have to endure the hardship of slightly changed browser settings.

 

[RobAnybody]

Aaaand... that's exactly what would happen in one of these proposed threads.

 

[GhostWriter16]

That's an awful idea, the whole point is parallel commentary. With the whole "opening statement" thing, it's going to be obvious if you really change your angle halfway through, and besides, it takes skill to use any argument effectively.

I think you are right on this.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I challenge JollyRoger to a debate on any subject that neither of us are experts on.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

With the whole "opening statement" thing, it's going to be obvious if you really change your angle halfway through, and besides, it takes skill to use any argument effectively.

All an opening statement needs to be is something along the lines of (for example) "I intend to show/prove that Canada should boycott the Summer Olympics in Moscow."

That's it. No revealing strategy or specific arguments. It's simply a way of restating that the individual is taking either the affirmative or negative position in the debate. The example I used was a position I actually had to debate in my Grade 12 social studies class back in 1979.

BTW, folks, there is a thread about this debate stuff in Site Feedback... it hasn't been posted in for awhile (hint, hint).

 

[hobbsyoyo]

All an opening statement needs to be is something along the lines of (for example) "I intend to show/prove that Canada should boycott the Summer Olympics in Moscow."

That's it. No revealing strategy or specific arguments. It's simply a way of restating that the individual is taking either the affirmative or negative position in the debate. The example I used was a position I actually had to debate in my Grade 12 social studies class back in 1979.

BTW, folks, there is a thread about this debate stuff in Site Feedback... it hasn't been posted in for awhile (hint, hint).

link please

 

[Cutlass]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=473856


Not hard to find. Site Feedback is the last forum section on the bottom of the main forum page. You should check in there from time to time if you are interested in what is going on with the site itself.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Thanks a million!

 

[JollyRoger]

I challenge JollyRoger to a debate on any subject that neither of us are experts on.

Nice way to weasel out of havng to debate me.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Nice way to weasel out of havng to debate me.

Tell me, what would either of us get out of a debate about the law or aerospace engineering?

But if those are the only things you want to debate, then I'm game. We can even do the law. You game?

 

[Dachs]

Tell me, what would either of us get out of a debate about the law or aerospace engineering?

But if those are the only things you want to debate, then I'm game. We can even do the law. You game?

The joke was that he's an expert on everything.

 

[JollyRoger]

I'm game and willing to debate any topic.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The joke was that he's an expert on everything.

Facepalm.

I think I lost the debate before it started.

 

[Cutlass]

I'm game and willing to debate any topic.

Can you defend the designated hitter rule?

 

[JollyRoger]

Can you defend the designated hitter rule?

Yeah, though I may have to resort to The Common Law Origins of the Inflield Fly Rule for support.

 

[LucyDuke]

All an opening statement needs to be is something along the lines of (for example) "I intend to show/prove that Canada should boycott the Summer Olympics in Moscow."

That's it. No revealing strategy or specific arguments. It's simply a way of restating that the individual is taking either the affirmative or negative position in the debate. The example I used was a position I actually had to debate in my Grade 12 social studies class back in 1979.

BTW, folks, there is a thread about this debate stuff in Site Feedback... it hasn't been posted in for awhile (hint, hint).

In a venue like this that sounds like a useless formality. I wouldn't bother with requiring it if it didn't have any meat. (Consider an opening statement in a trial.)

Though I admit that might not reveal one's intentions, I'm still not worried about "stealing arguments" from the commentary thread.