PF Debates: Will You Participate?

Discussion in 'Debates & Contests' started by E_Pluribus_Venom, Jul 9, 2011.

?

Are you willing to participate in 1 on 1 debates here at PoliticalForum?

  1. Yes

    52.6%
  2. No

    25.3%
  3. Maybe... Some clarification is needed

    24.2%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    For whatever reason you are not getting the main thrust of this. People already debate, and this site is a open debate format a format people respect and like. The interest is not there for your one on one exclusion debates. You want this? fine, no problem. Do like everybody else does and open a debate group in the group section and leave the threads alone.
    Why cant you get this? It is not us making a big deal out of this but you. For some uncanny reason you feel people MUST agree,,they don't. Stop making such a big deal of this. Nobody cares about your competition, go compete against yourselves.
    Somebody thought it would be a good idea, well the vast majority thinks it's not. It's as simple as that, and it is highly doubtful any ''repair'' job will gain anymore interest but heck if the Mods want to waste their time, so be it. I imagine if it were 95% showing no interest we would here the same thing.
    It's Fixable,,WE CANT BE THIS WRONG!!!...............they are. It's starting to sound like Obama care....:roll:
     
  2. frodly

    frodly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    17,989
    Likes Received:
    427
    Trophy Points:
    83


    When you are out of ideas, straw men are your only option are they not? Before this thread I never offered any support for this idea, in fact I only offered reservations. I simply don't see a reason to oppose it. It isn't exclusive at all. Anyone can join in, and can debate another person. The idea was meant to be fun and novel, like a presidential style debate. However since a few conservatives said no :ignore: and a few liberals said that sounds like a good idea, now the hive mentality has kicked in, and this has somehow turned into a partisan issue. You tried to make it a partisan issue in the above post. It isn't at all. Not one bit!! It is simply an issue where some people like the idea, some people have reservations, and others are irrationally opposed to it. This shouldn't be a controversial issue, yet you and your lot have decided to make it into one. Why? If you don't want to participate, don't. It is not a serious enough issue to go on a crusade in opposition!!
     
  3. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nobody is out to ruin anybodies fun, they are welcome like any of us to open a group and debate away, what is their problem? We do not want Exclusive threads and that is the problem, this is a open forum anybody is allowed to participate and have a say. So when you have something that is exclusive you are supposed to make a group, and put it there like others have had the courtesy to do. But we are not trying to ruin anybodies fun, there just not the interest in leaving others out....follow?
     
  4. Perriquine

    Perriquine On hiatus Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    9,587
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I answered no, but only because I don't feel I have the time to devote to it. I'm otherwise in favor of the idea.

    I have no interest in judging the debate, but am interested in reading what the participants have to say.
     
  5. flounder

    flounder In Memoriam Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    27,364
    Likes Received:
    653
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Naaaaa, this is not Exclusive.....NOT MUCH!

    Really?, read this;;;

    ''If you choose not to accept the challenge issued, you won't be permitted to participate in the exchange taking place in the debate thread itself (until judging is complete). However, if you'd like to quote portions of the exchange and discuss it elsewhere (sideline thread) then you're free to do that...which enables you to make your points with all who also didn't accept the issued challenge. Those who are debating are also free to participate in such a sideline thread.''

    Sorry, but you do not know the difference between open posting and Exclusive. When you figure it out let me know...screw this ''Challenge issued'', screw this ''Wont be permitted'' Ahhh, but we are ''ALLOWED'' to discuss it elsewhere,,,,WHAT'S ELSEWHERE? You mean from where we were not ALLOWED??,,,How white of you!
    WHEN THE HELL WAS THIS EVER DONE ON THIS SITE? This is a open posting site to EVERYBODY, NO EXCLUSIONS, and we would like to keep it that way.

    Go open a little Exclusive debate group. Maybe you will win a Trophy! Not interested.
    You will find me and others debating with all the rest of the people, we do not want your one on one competitions. We enjoy each others company, you obviously do not.
     
  6. creation

    creation New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    11,999
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Now thats cool.

    Ive always wanted to try that, its truly the test of a hard working intellect.

    Why are the cons here so scared of this? They dont even have to be judged exclusively by liberals, they dont have to take part, they dont have to do anything.
     
  7. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Noted. Thanks for your input.

    It's a good idea teamo... and something we could throw into a challenge here and there. It would make for quite an interesting read.
     
  8. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    We spoke briefly on it, and it's been decided that the debates will be held at the bottom of the forum in the "Debates & Contests" section. Although such debates can already happen with member initiated threads, this is an option to organize it a bit more.

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Good enough. I see your point.
    ==========================================
    Now this.









    While I am a bit miffed at some of the posters who seem to not want to give this a try, see where it leads, while using 'we' to group all of us into the same basket, I wonder if these rather snobbish, in part even rude, comments have something to do with it?
    Of course it doesn't help to leave the door wide open, using 'we', so that our friends can readily group us into a 'hive', and kick us in our collective rear.

    But I must ask, whats with all these rather condescending remarks?
    As inviting and welcoming as the quoted posts (only a small sample) make the proposed discussions, I must wonder if I, as a fellow inferior hick should even bother?
    Why with all this perception of intellectual superiority, I wonder if it weren't easier for y'all to just hang the ribbon around your necks right now?
    I understand, its not easy to be objective about ourselves, and its easier to see faults in others, not knowing how we come across, so I would suggest that y'all get your high brown into neutral for a bit.
    If y'all just want to debate among intellectual equals, why bother even addressing the inferior hive?
    What would go a long way would be something like

    "lets give it a shot"
    "its all for fun"
    "we don't know where it leads either, but lets see".

    Since I don't see that happen, perhaps, the first subject up for discussion could be...

    Today's discussion "the irony of compassion".
    Why do intellectual elitist sit on such a high horse while speaking for the inferior masses?

    Again, the quotes are just a small sample of what I have read last night and this morning.
    I suggest you read through the various debate threads and see for yourselves.
    Both sides seem to be going over the deep end with this, instead of some constructive criticism, you will find cheap shots coming from both sides, mine included to make a point.
    Its not reflective of PF, its not reflective of right or left, its reflective of only a few, who seem to speak for the rest of us.
    Not sure if that makes the proposed discussions a desirable experience. But I guess we have to wait and see, assuming we find posters who see themselves as equals in every way, regardless whether they are liberal or conservative.


    As judges, may I suggest
    Cenydd
    African Hope
    Falena
    Absolute Voluntarist
    Fact Checker
    (excuse misspelling, please)
     
  10. John1735

    John1735 Banned Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,521
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Conservative moderators can endorse the idea till the cows come home. That won't change the FACT it's a bad idea, and one which the poll shows, most of those members who have voted in the poll, clearly are two to one against.
     
    Trinnity and (deleted member) like this.
  11. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Note that the quotes you used are reactions to reluctance in giving this a try... and the reasons some people are reluctant to participate were voiced well before anyone here made perceivably rude comments. Rather than focus on what I believe to be selective quoting, let's continue to discover a method that will please more potential participants.
     
  12. E_Pluribus_Venom

    E_Pluribus_Venom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    15,691
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    This poll isn't to gauge if it should happen, so allow me to clear that suggestion up. It's a poll for to us measure how frequent we'll be initiating debates. I'm surprised more didn't choose the "maybe" option vs. "Yes" considering a few factors... most notably the fact that there is no final structure for how it'll take place. For those willing to participate and be judged, the somewhat popular arguments against this idea wouldn't matter... like bias, as some are willing to give it a shot either way. For those that do not wish to participate, nothing will change.
     
  13. The Somalian Pirate Bay

    The Somalian Pirate Bay Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I am bemused by the visceral reaction against the suggestions really.

    What harm is having a one on one debate actually going to do? It'd make a good change from the general swarm of posters that create an echo chamber within many topics.

    It'll take some tweaking most likely, and some actual effort from posters(again a nice change) but I really don't understand the (partisan) backlash that has developed even before it has been tried.
     
  14. Shangrila

    Shangrila staff Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    29,114
    Likes Received:
    674
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Lol, I guess my trying to bring a point across backfired?:sun:
    In all fairness, the back and forth didn't just start here and now, and it probably leads up to the reluctance.
    Sadly, we will never find out how much fun it could be unless we try.
    That's all.
    Make it fun, not a test of superiority.
     
  15. teamosil

    teamosil New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Messages:
    16,022
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Everything always has to be some kind of conspiracy theory with the wingnuts. It's obnoxious and stupid. We don't need to try to coddle them into doing something fun. If they would rather sit around in the quorum and sulk or whatever, that's fine, we can do it just fine without them.
     
  16. Falena

    Falena Cherry Bomb Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    25,141
    Likes Received:
    6,724
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I thought the point you made was an extremely valid one and very well said.
    In my opinion we have two dynamics going on here.

    One is the basic concept of researched debate and the format to which it will be presented. Personally, I can't see a problem with two people debating in a closed thread. As long as it is in the debate section and as long as the rest of the board is free to start the exact debate challenge somewhere else on the board. I'm not comfortable with the suggestion of judging. If this debate is to be taken seriously then not only is it the obligation of whom ever signs on to participate to research the topic and elevate the discussion with facts to back up statements it is also the obligation of anyone who judges this to be qualified in a field of debate judging.

    Being non partisan is so easy to say. But when the rubber hits the road it takes some serious dedication and soul searching to maintain that stance. I'm not belittling anyone who signed up to judge just stating my opinion on the self check of being fair minded in making judgment decisions. I would also assume there is some criteria that debate judges use for guidelines. This should be of equal importance to have people with that knowledge. If those criteria cant be met what significance would the final judgement have? None in my opinion.

    The second dynamic is motive. What is the motive behind this debate concept? Is it to elevate the discussions of the board and showcase the level of dedication some have to topics and research or is it to one up one side or another?
     
  17. teamosil

    teamosil New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Messages:
    16,022
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just to be clear, my "we don't need them" attitude doesn't extend to the folks like Frogger, taxpayer, Shangrila, Falena, Shiva, Southpaw, Ankidote and Sir Thaddeus. Any of those folks I would love to have be involved. I'd love to judge a debate they participate in and I'd love to participate in a debate they judged. In fact, I'd have zero problem with an all conservative judging panel as long as it was drawn from folks in that tier.
     
  18. Trinnity

    Trinnity Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    10,645
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not surprised by your trolling/bullying remarks. But I do appreciate you reaffirming the mean spirited tone of your posts and the reason why you should not be a judge of debates.

    I don't want to see newbie conservatives driven away from this site because they got suckered into a debate that they couldn't possibly win and instead just get beat up by a liberal veteran of the site.

    The ONLY way this could work is if there is NO judging and leave the newbies alone. Since I have no say in the parameters of the debate rules, I don't expect this suggestion to be implemented. So, my position remains the same. I'll pass.
     
  19. Swamp_Music

    Swamp_Music Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    3,477
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    48
     
  20. teamosil

    teamosil New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    Messages:
    16,022
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Me being mean spirited? EPV came up with a cool idea for something fun to do on the site and you guys (*)(*)(*)(*) all over it for no reason...

    I don't see why a veteran liberal would want to debate somebody they could easily beat... What would the point in that be?
     
    Gwendoline and (deleted member) like this.
  21. Think for myself

    Think for myself Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,277
    Likes Received:
    4,594
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh (*)(*)(*)(*)! I have to say thank you for that one. I laughed out loud at the irony and the pathetic, mewling nature of that post.

    Obviously, it is far more important to have "conservative" people here than smart ones,. and we sure as (*)(*)(*)(*)ting don't want to scare off the stupid ones, eh Trinnity? Yes indeed, you better make sure that you have plenty of fresh "conservative" types here, and surely if they can not compete intellectually you should not allow them to compete at all.

    Great post. Absolutely stunning in it's needy nature and blatant socialist undertones.
     
    Gwendoline and (deleted member) like this.
  22. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL. Teamosil trolling? He's far more respected than anyone else in this thread. Though to save this from the edit, the mods are up there too (yeah right).

    LOL. So you don't think conservatives can win? Interesting!

    Yeah, I literally smiled to the point it was almost a laugh out loud moment.
     
  23. John1735

    John1735 Banned Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,521
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    0
    While I agree that some will percieve bias everywhere they look.

    E there is already a perception of unfairness and a "loaded" bias if you will.

    I believe, and no for certain in some instances that this is why more folks have voted NO than yes.

    I don't think, that perception is going to change or go away, no matter who participates or who doesn't.

    So why sanction an activity that is going to increase such a perception, no matter what is done or not done? In my own humble two cents worth, I think it's damaging to the reputation the site has, to engage in activities which will only serve to perpetuate an appearance of political bias.

    Regardless of whether that perceived bias be pro liberal or pro conservative.

    If I were running the show and I readily admit I'm not.

    But if it were my site, I wouldn't allow my moderation staff to do that. I would insist they and my site function in as unbiased and fair a manner as is humanely possible.

    But to each their own I guess.
     
  24. creation

    creation New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Messages:
    11,999
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The motive is clear. Its to get us away from the stupid ranting of so many here. While some make ranting unbacked posts, others will just tell in large letter that Obama or GWB is a loser etc etc.

    For some reason they think this is a reasonable contribution, we know better.

    My personal motive would be illustrate the true nature of applied impartiality. If I were judging my verdict would be on how well the argument is given, whether or not i agree with it.

    If I were debating, it allows me to take on my opponents without fear of either they being able to ignore my posts or insulting me - as they readily do in the middle east forum.

    People such as The Judge, snakestetcher, Klip Klap, Shiva, moon who are the mainstay of the middle east forum are ready to either take up this challenge or to encourage this development.
     
  25. Catch

    Catch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    8,092
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's a joke, right? The ME forum is not going anywhere.
     

Share This Page