MOD ANNOUNCEMENT: Member Debates (Input needed)

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

  1. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Flounder...

    I have to ask if you're serious. At this point, I have to. Either the above quote is the result of not reading what's been explained here, or just choosing to interpret it however you like.
     
  2. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Multitude of debates? Have you researched yet how many will accept a debate? So far all I have seen is people say they cant, and more people willing to judge than debate. If it is only a couple of debates it's not a mess.
     
  3. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This has been an open posting site, and now you want to restrict that open posting. That would be changing the site.
    This is why it would be better off in group, why should the majority of posters be excluded?

    You can have a one on one on any thread, nobody is stopping you. Nobody interrupts any of the debates I have been in. When was yours?
     
  4. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    a good number of people have contacted me with debate ideas, so yes... and also beside the point. Creating a social group for debates will be a navigational mess without the ability to create threads.

    You're only excluded if you wish to not a) volunteer for debate or b) participate in an alternate thread that offers commentary for what's being discussed in the debate. Once more, you can quote the material in the debate and post it in your own thread if you wish to discuss the material, and there's nothing...repeat: nothing... stopping you from doing it (which also means there's nothing stopping the quoted individual from participating in your thread). The only reason the debate thread has restricted access is to control traffic and maintain a clean/fair exchange for both the participants and the judges. If a non-participant exposes a weakness in someone's argument, that person's opponent can/will capitalize off of it (rendering his/her individual performance tainted). There is no help in 1 on 1 debates, and that's the point. If that's scary... *shrugs*
     
  5. Til the Last Drop

    Til the Last Drop Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2010
    Messages:
    9,069
    Likes Received:
    384
    Trophy Points:
    83
    So you are talking about a completely new section on top of what we already have for this? Well if that's the case why not? Be prepared to get flooded with mails from people who believe they could of presented a better argument than the one of the person selected. This could be a major headache for you all in long run. Word to the wise.
     
  6. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No doubt :below:

     
  7. dreadpiratejaymo

    dreadpiratejaymo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So there is already part of this forum that isn't an "Open Forum". You you think it would be a bad idea to make a new section that isn't an open forum?

    I really am confused as to the origin of your ire.
     
    B.Larset and (deleted member) like this.
  8. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I did not ask about ideas, I asked who has volunteered to debate. The only thing I have seen is ideas. You need right and left volunteers, and a lot of them for this to be worth doing. Who has volunteered?
    It is not a navigational mess if held like a real debate. One gives their stance, the other theirs. There is not supposed to be interruptions for every little point. The first person gets a certain amount of words to express their views, the other the same. It does not go on forever.
    They can have a small counter to rap up, one person uses black, the other red...that's so hard?, a nightmare?
    Everybody here is smart enough to follow that, unless they are color blind. If you must interrupt every sentence and pick it apart [as we do in regular debates] just use the colors from the start, you find that hard? This belongs in the group section, the debate part for sure. It is only a small group that will join a debate club, this site is not a debate club. As pointed out before you are not supposed to exclude people from anything, if that's what you are doing then you are a group, a club.

    But you cant have it judged, as pointed out the judges are tainted. Why would anybody trust them? and as far as them creating a thread, we do not need them, just post the thread, like always.
    There is not one person here from the left I would trust as a judge, not one. I am sure the left says that as well about the right.
    People that have lengthy debates rarely depend on others, so what it seems to be is more of a contest and not actually informative so much. I cant see any way possible it could be fair. I cant imagine anybody here being intellectually honest and saying...''Oh there wont be any Bias'' the entire place is Bias including the Mods. If you do not know that by now *shrugs*

    Put it where it belongs, [where all things go that exclude people], the group area. Then you can have your own little club, everybody can watch the debate if they choose and your traffic problem is solved. You will not have any ''nightmare'' with the format, just use colors...problem solved.
     
  9. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Gimme a hammer and I'll break them ties on the spot.:-D
    Seriously, how about adding a poll to see how many are even interested.
    (not that it matters much, since we can take it or leave it)
    Reading through the thread, seems its only very few, so it shouldn't be much of a bother to those who don't care for it much.
     
  10. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    dread, You are not here that much but possibly you have not noticed, we are having major problems with the site, it runs horribly slow at times. We have been condensing, not expanding. This is what we were told. So people [some] contributed money as this was worth while doing. Now we are told different? Now that they have the money? I would not have contributed if that were the case. I and others want the site to run faster as we were TOLD, not add on things on. [especially exclusive groups] We were not told this, we were deceived.
    If this goes through then we should demand separate threads for the Gays and Religious folks as well as both groups are open to horrible trolling, and the hell with the speed. We have the same rights as their group. Anything that is not inclusive of all is a group. Either you join by volunteering to debate or you are excluded in some areas. It's exclusive.

    That's the point, we already have a section for people that want to exclude others. Why are we adding another? Most places have areas for groups, nothing new. There is no reason to add more strain on the system, we are condensing,,not adding.
    I really have not heard a decent argument against this. I think they do not want to be known as a club, or separate. That's wrong, if they are excluding people then they are separate. There will be a very small group of people that will debate, I believe much smaller than they imagine.
     
  11. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    IT'S NOT TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT,,,they are adding something on that will slow us down even more, we are supposed to be condensing, not expanding. Did they cut the other areas?, did they ask for donations to speed the site up? Will this speed the site up?

    This effects all of us.

    Exactly, we have to know how many actually want to debate one on one.
     
  12. Gwendoline

    Gwendoline Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,938
    Likes Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Sounds like a great thing, EPV. And thanks.

    It is a DEBATE forum afterall. :) Would be great to hear a serious, dedicated debate away / and apart from the tedious adolescent trolling that invades / and dumbs-down so many threads.
     
  13. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The forum is not a democracy. The site owner can do whatever they desire. People have been given the opportunity to comment on the idea, which of course opens the door for people to be abusive.

    If you want to engage in a serious discussion of the matter, we can do that. Comments like the quoted item do not contribute anything of value.

    I can't believe such a stink is being made over this. I guess it just provides us with further evidence of the deterioration of civility in discourse.

    I'm about as disgusted as I can possibly be right now. If the powers that be decide not to go forward with this idea because of a few people throwing tantrums just because they can, I would find that really sad.
     
  14. Rapunzel

    Rapunzel New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    25,154
    Likes Received:
    1,107
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I haven't read through the whole thread and I will, but at this point it does not seem like a good idea for one reason...that being the judges. You just don't become a judge. Judges go through years of experience and they are voted to be judges because of their fairness, applying the rule of law, no bias, no agenda...etc. Judges in area's must pass criteria, tests etc. before they can judge anything. What is the criteria here??? Duh....you want to be a judge, just put your name in....OMG!!!!

    We have a mod on here, just asking who would like to be a judge....LMFAO!!! This will be a total cluster (*)(*)(*)(*) IMO. It will be cons voting for cons and libs voting for libs...come on people get real.
     
  15. Frogger

    Frogger Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    9,394
    Likes Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    63
    And here we have the gist of the problem.

    Some of us feel superior to hoi polloi, those they consider 'tedious adolescents'. They want a special area for the elite of Political Forum, the Political Forum aristocracy if you will.

    Why should the 'better' posters be subjected to the comments of the common herd, those who either have debating skills below theirs or who post comments they find of a lesser caliber?

    While the idea may have been well intentioned it is nothing more than setting up a two tiered system of posters, those deemed worthy of being invited to debate and those deemed unworthy. Even those deemed worthy will be excluded from discussion in the thread if they do not bow to the wishes of the inviter and participate wholeheartedly in the debate but rather prefer to read what has been posted and make occasional comments.

    Bye the way, who will be doing the inviting? Who, at Political Forum is either so great a poster or so unbiased a poster that they can decide which people meet their personal standards for invitation?

    We have already had suggestions from some posters to forbid comments that, while they fall well within the terms of service of Political Forum are considered distasteful or unworthy of being posted. That idea was felt to be exclusionary and was shot down. Now we have another exclusionary idea being seriously debated. It is being suggested that certain, particular threads be set aside for 'the better folk' and the rest of us simply sit around, read their pearls of wisdom and perhaps ruminate over them, but in no ways contribute to the conversation in that thread. Another thread will be open to the 'general public' while the stars have at it toe to toe and head to head.

    While the idea was well intentioned and at first glance seems harmless it is anything but. I don't want anyone making the decision that I either am or am not worthy of being invited to participate in a debate.

    This has been an open forum where all are invited to offer their views in any thread posted and in my opinion it should remain that.
     
  16. Rapunzel

    Rapunzel New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    25,154
    Likes Received:
    1,107
    Trophy Points:
    0

    So basically two will debate and then you will open it for all the trolls to come in and then the mods will close it like they do most of the trolled threads, instead of actually banning or infracting the perps....what's the point???
     
  17. tomfoo13ry

    tomfoo13ry Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    15,962
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I don't know what the original proposal entails exactly. I wouldn't care for a system of 'invite only' where the mods pick who is worthy. However, I would support a system where two members (ANY two members) can decide that they want to debate each other on a certain topic and then are given a thread where they can do so.

    I assumed the latter system was what was being proposed. Could we get clarification on that point?
     
  18. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Had you read the whole thread, you would have seen that the debaters will have some say in who will be acceptable as a judge.

    I will say that I think it's problematic having regular posters be the judges. I think on the forum I used to inhabit, the mods & admins were the judges, but I'm not sure of that.
     
  19. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This is an excellent question, and the area I find most problematic.

    Where I've seen this done before, there were partisan groups who selected someone to represent them in the debate. We don't have any structure resembling that here.
     
  20. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why?

    How is it a prize at all?
    I debate all the time, obviously; but if everybody here voted me the best debater while betraying no evidence of having been enlightened by anything I said, I'd consider my time to have been wasted completely.
     
  21. Frogger

    Frogger Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    9,394
    Likes Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This thread has been an active one with lots of different posters participating. Now imagine it as a thread in which only two posters debated the topic while the rest of us were relegated to the role of spectator. Which is a better thread?
     
  22. Rapunzel

    Rapunzel New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    25,154
    Likes Received:
    1,107
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mods are not necessarily good judges. Posters are not necessarily good judges. There is no criteria to be a judge other than to volunteer. Sorry, that don't cut it for me.
     
  23. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    If it's the latter system, then I think flounder may have a legitimate beef.

    Is something like the following workable?
    • Mods announce the topic with directions for candidate submissions. Maybe do this a week ahead of time, announcing a starting date & time, ending date & time for submissions to be accepted.
    • Interested parties submit their talking points in brief with a short summarizing paragraph via PM.
    • Mods evaluate the submissions and come to a consensus on whom to invite
    • Mods PM the winning candidates to confirm their commitment to the debate, with tentative dates for the debate to begin
    • Once the debaters and dates are confirmed, Mods post the thread challenge, and the debate ensues.

    As for judging, I'll reiterate my opposition to the panel being composed of other posters. I think that responsibility should be vested in the Mods. Mods would obviously be ineligible as debate candidates.

    As for format, each debater makes one post to present their arguments, another to rebut their opponent's arguments, and a third as a summary closing/response to the rebuttal. Judges evaluate the posts, announce final judgment and close the thread.

    I disagree with opening the thread up to commentary after the debate. I'd rather see a separate thread opened with a link back to the debate; maybe something that quotes the best arguments made by each side from the judges' perspective. I think if people want to quote other portions thereafter to discuss, they should be able to do that.
     
  24. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    If they're good enough to be mods, then I consider them good enough to be judges.
     
  25. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That would depend entirely upon the quality of arguments made in the hypothetical closed thread.
     

Share This Page