DEBATE TEAMS, organized setups and signups.

[Roland_Deschain]

Well I have to say this is very interesting set up you have here.

Are you going have Judge and a Jury also?

and how many "teams" are you planning on having?

And as far as the FF Questions are concern, most of those are going be very opinionated so providing true sources as to why one hero is the best or why one game is better than the other would be very tough.

The judges are anyone who watches. I am thinking two poles sounds good. 1 reflecting the viewers opinions, and the other reflecting which side presented better.

Teams will be figured by the setups and who is willing to join on which debates. Or the teams will be created at the users own discretion and they will open up an invitation to a debate with their own team.

As far as FF goes, I think philisophical debates are fun too, so its worth a go as well.

I think maybe we can make a case ruling. IF the voting time does not net the right setup of teams within a week, then the sides will can be randomly selected... that way we have first choice at our own sides, and have a fail safe plan, along with enough time to prepare. HOW does that sound guys? And I think like anything it could have settings. For example if you have a team you wouldn't very well subject yourself to the random test right? However, perhaps we can make a couple debates a week, 1 for random, 1 for standard, and 1 for FF

I think we should make this start and work together from the beggining, before start leaning upon the assistance of an admin or voluteering them to assign us places. We should demonstrate that this can work first, before we can rely on their availability.

 

[Will Graham]

He has a point though, as far as I recall in school there was a limit on the amount of words each debater could use. As well as an established order the team went in, and then the election of someone to make specific rebuttals to the opposition's argument

If people are forcibly assigned a side, then you should remove the option to swap teams

 

[Roland_Deschain]

He has a point though, as far as I recall in school there was a limit on the amount of words each debater could use. As well as an established order the team went in, and then the election of someone to make specific rebuttals to the opposition's argument

If people are forcibly assigned a side, then you should remove the option to swap teams

Yes the first part I asked about, should it be post time frame or word amount or what? Give me your opinions.

I think think the random setting can have no swap team option, but the standard can.

 

[Will Graham]

Yes the first part I asked about, should it be post time frame or word amount or what? Give me your opinions.

I am unsure, I think a debate should be limited to 48-72 hours, you would have to ask someone else about how many posts, and the word limit of each post per user

I think think the random setting can have no swap team option, but the standard can.

ofc

 

[Ewan]

I think I may wait and see how the first debate pans out before signing up. I think it's an interesting idea though.

I'm not entirely convinced about assigning sides though. If there is a topic and there are insufficient people to make up 2 sides of equal numbers, then I'm not sure it would be an appropriate one to use. Whilst playing devil's advocate is a useful exercise, it can only go so far and I don't see how it will work on certain topics.

IMO the debates teams should consist of people who actually hold the views they are defending, or people who don't mind switching sides.

 

[Donald Trump]

He has a point though, as far as I recall in school there was a limit on the amount of words each debater could use. As well as an established order the team went in, and then the election of someone to make specific rebuttals to the opposition's argument

If people are forcibly assigned a side, then you should remove the option to swap teams

There's normally a time limit. Though choosing specific people for rebuttals would be too much of a chore.

I do not know what being cringed is but it sounds painful. But if you implying or even inferring that I was my flaming my good pal Harlequin you would be wrong. I was saying that his posts are far too long for anyone who is not extremely interested in the topic. And brevity is the soul of wit etc etc.

People should be given the choice of what side they wish to debate, until it becomes unequal, and after that all people wishing to join should be assigned at random.

Edit:
The only topic that interested me is the abortion one, but that's been played out so many times before.

 

[CassinoChips]

I wouldn't plan on this getting its own sub-forum, just speaking from being on staff for a while. But it is a good idea in general. I would think there needs to be someone who is the moderator (for lack of a better term) of each debate, someone to organize the flow, and to keep debates on track. Also, invariably there will come poor debating techniques (fallacies, etc.), and these need to be pointed out/resolved. This could rotate through a few volunteers or something.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

OK EVERYONE. Here are some basic guildelines that will be enforced for the team debates.

- Each debatist will be allowed no more then 800 Words per post.
- Each Debatist will be allowed no more then 15 overall posts during the debate's duration.
- All forms of insults are strictly forbiddon.
- Every "question" given by a person, must be addressed by the person it was asked to.
- All statistics using percents, ratio's, numbers, must be coupled with posted information.
- The duration of each debate will be five days in length in order to work smoothly.
- Every opponent must cross words with each other at least once, no 1v1 in a 3v3 debate.
- Use proper Grammar.
- Do NOT lie. Lying is strictly forbiddon. Only provide honest truths and stated opinions, do not present opinions as facts.
- No trolling.


Friendly advice for everyone.

Avoid the use of "Never".
Avoid the use of "Always".
Refrain from saying "You are wrong".
You can say, "Your idea is mistaken".
Don't disagree with obvious truths.
Attack the idea not the person.
Use the word "Many" or "Some" rather than "Most".
Avoid exaggeration.
The use of "Often" and "Generally" allows for exceptions.
Quote sources and numbers.
If it is just an opinion, admit it.
Do not present opinion as facts.
Stress the positive.
You do not need to win every battle to win the war.
Concede minor or trivial points.
Avoid bickering, quarreling, and wrangling.
Don't win a debate and lose a friend.
Be open minded about religion.
Keep your perspective - You're just debating.

 

[Six]

I just have a question.

Just because I voted, I'm not automatically put in a team am I? I just voted for what I'd like to see discussed, because I rather not be in any discussions.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I just have a question.

Just because I voted, I'm not automatically put in a team am I? I just voted for what I'd like to see discussed, because I rather not be in any discussions.

Yeah just edit that. The votes are designed to create the debate. It lets us know who is intrested in participating so we can decided when to begin.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

ok yall. Two polls are open, the FF game debate one is filled, but the other one still have some places.

The rules are posted a little bit back in this thread.

The sign ups for being a moderator and other involvment are created in a seperate thread.

Please stay active to at least get this started. So please keep promoting the idea and supporting the idea in every way possible.

 

[Shaissa]

I like getting a public vote, I was kinda thinking like giving "points" away.

like have a public vote where its kinda a majority rules kinda deal, the team with the most votes get those "points"

Then have the "mods" or "judges" or whatever you wanna call them vote, now you can have it again be a majority rule kinda deal where the winning side gets all the "points" or you can have it where each "mod" has a point and whoever they vote for gets there point.

then whichever side gets the most "points" wins the debate.

 

[Abstract Debauchery]

If the polls are left open for the public to vote (which I assume to be the case), just be sure to hold them so that people can see the names of who voted.

 

[Ethics]

1) A better idea of how long these will be. For example, will one pop off each week? How would you go about the polls, team sign ups (you're still going with picking your own team, right?) as well as the actual debate with that time frame?

Perhaps this is a project for every other week. One week for collecting score of the previous debate, cycling ideas, publishing sign ups and appointing your "mods" for that debate. The following week would be the debate week (yes, an entire week). Cycling between those two is (in my mind) the best way to manage everything you will need to do. It would be very easy to become very burnt out from the constant demand of weekly debates.

2) A different name for your mods. I know you aiming to avoid mess and confusion. This is a very simple, small step in the right direction.

3) Punctuation. Literally. You're going for a serious debate thread, full of collected facts, opinions and lifestyles. Things get confusing easy. Personally I skip all debate posts that are an enormous wall of text, which could have easily been broken down to make easier to read and follow along with. I don't expect everyone to seem like a college professor with every post, it isn't hard to run things through word or similar programs (if you have them) first to catch simple mistakes that could be breaking or essential.

My opinion is a simple reminder within your rules, somewhere along the lines of:

"Remember, this is a professional environment. While poor grammar is not an offense that can bar you from these debates, some readers may choose to simply skip the posts which you have poured your effort into."

 

[Rydrum2112]

ok yall. Two polls are open, the FF game debate one is filled, but the other one still have some places.

The rules are posted a little bit back in this thread.

The sign ups for being a moderator and other involvment are created in a seperate thread.

Please stay active to at least get this started. So please keep promoting the idea and supporting the idea in every way possible.

Wait a minute- the debate topic was mine and I didn't even get in!!! hahaha. I typically only have time to check this site once a day in the evening so I think there should be a window of response time (allows those with busier schedules to still be included).

Also instead of a true word limit- each person should be responsible enough to only address 1 thing and that would keep each rebuttal shorter.

 

[Donald Trump]

Who made Ambassador Awesome the boss of all this?

Surely as many people as possible should be allowed to join the debates, as long as the teams are equal. Not just three people on each side for the abortion topic, three people seems to me to be a pathetic number for a team.

And I don't mean to be rude, because if I did I wouldn't use that phrase, but Ambassador Awesome's grasp of English sometimes leaves a little to be desired. I think it would be desirable if someone with a more sound understanding of English was to make the thread and start the debate. Maybe one of the 'debate mods', or perhaps CAssinoChips, he is so great.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

Who made Ambassador Awesome the boss of all this?

Surely as many people as possible should be allowed to join the debates, as long as the teams are equal. Not just three people on each side for the abortion topic, three people seems to me to be a pathetic number for a team.

And I don't mean to be rude, because if I did I wouldn't use that phrase, but Ambassador Awesome's grasp of English sometimes leaves a little to be desired. I think it would be desirable if someone with a more sound understanding of English was to make the thread and start the debate. Maybe one of the 'debate mods', or perhaps @CAssinoChips, he is so great.

I am sorry Hal, but this does come off as a very rude. Did you start this up and put all of your time forward to get a working idea running? Are you trying to get the involvment of the forum so to make it "everyones" idea? Also I have put made about 80 posts, and answered "ANY" questions asked about it. Furthermore I have attempted to be fair in the construction, and add others to the job or helping. So why don't you simply say thank you for your hard work instead of insulting my grammer.

I would say I am doing a pretty damn good job for only two days of work. So if you have to complain about that then take it somewhere else, because this is not vain ambition... and I do not think anyone wants it to be.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

Thank you POCKETS for your support and assistance in all of this. I'm sure it is greatly appreciated by everyone who wants it to happen. /bow /clap




While I'm tempted to agree to do this, I would actually like to see every one become involved. Chances are I will already be modding around in there, so I am a "watch dog" already.

I agree. These people won't serve as just watch dogs, but like guardian angels of the idea itself, intent on offering ideas and helping it grow.

I am also not a very good person to produce debating ideas. It's just not a talent of mine to have controversial topics floating around in my little mind.

Dont be so modest =)

I do, however, have some things you may want to consider adding to your oncoming debates. I will post the exact same list in the other thread, but to save you the effort...

Anyone is welcome to offer suggestions

1) A better idea of how long these will be. For example, will one pop off each week? How would you go about the polls, team sign ups (you're still going with picking your own team, right?) as well as the actual debate with that time frame?

So far we have talked very little about it (this is one of the reasons for this thread, to make people who have intrest step up and volunteer.) We did mention two voting polls would be good. One would reflect what side the viewer stands on, and the other would refect the team or users that they think did the best job debating their sides. This ratio of difference is a good showing sign for how well you did.

Perhaps this is a project for every other week. One week for collecting score of the previous debate, cycling ideas, publishing sign ups and appointing your "mods" for that debate. The following week would be the debate week (yes, an entire week). Cycling between those two is (in my mind) the best way to manage everything you will need to do. It would be very easy to become very burnt out from the constant demand of weekly debates.

Yes this is what I am hoping for. Seeing as we have three catergorys: Randon setup, standard sign up, and FF. I figure we can have a cycle of at least one going on every week. Also we cannont forget about team challenges, which will involve any person on this forum who wants to set up a debate.

2) A different name for your mods. I know you aiming to avoid mess and confusion. This is a very simple, small step in the right direction.

Yes, SIX is making us a banner. We will henceforward be know as "The Debatists". I think its straightfoward, and others would agree with it, plus it sounds neat, TD's

3) Punctuation. Literally. You're going for a serious debate thread, full of collected facts, opinions and lifestyles. Things get confusing easy. Personally I skip all debate posts that are an enormous wall of text, which could have easily been broken down to make easier to read and follow along with. I don't expect everyone to seem like a college professor with every post, it isn't hard to run things through word or similar programs (if you have them) first to catch simple mistakes that could be breaking or essential.

I agree, myself included. I intend on running my posts through microsoft Word in order to get a word count and a spell check.

 

[Donald Trump]

I do not think it was rude.
All I asked was who made you the boss? Because it seems like you're making all the decisions. Perhaps I should have thrown in some flattering platitudes, but that's not my style. You seem to be making all the decisions, no one knows what is really going on, or what decisions have been made. So far there's been very little input from anyone but yourself, you effectively choose what will be debated, in what format and when.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I do not think it was rude.
All I asked was who made you the boss? Because it seems like you're making all the decisions. Perhaps I should have thrown in some flattering platitudes, but that's not my style. You seem to be making all the decisions, no one knows what is really going on, or what decisions have been made. So far there's been very little input from anyone but yourself, you effectively choose what will be debated, in what format and when.

I think you are the only one who has a problem with this. We have six confirmed reputable people to assist in this (including a mod), along with the backing of everyone except you. If I am not mistaken, I have offered the chance for everyone (including mods, and including yourself) to play a serious part in this. Almost all of my decisions have been influenced and backed by opinions and voices of other people. Is it really hard to just say thank you for losing sleep in order to attribute something neat to this forum?

I did not make myself boss, I have acted on an idea that I wanted to see work. If you did the same thing I wouldn't question you and put you down.

Furthermore, what does my english have to do with anything, when I have made it a point to involve others in this system, to watch myself included. Besides I am an English teacher, and I think when the time comes, you will find that I have an exceptional ability to speak well. No one said that you couldn't be a part of this, and no one said that Casino couldn't either. I have already spoken quite clearly on this matter, and you seem to be the only person who does not appreciate it. If you do not appreciate it, don't play a part. If you do appreciate it, play a part. I do not understand how a complaint like this helps progress.