DEBATE TEAMS, organized setups and signups.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roland_Deschain

Roland_Deschain

Transcending what is, with what could be.
Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
613
Age
38
Location
Currently working in China, born in the U S of A (
Gil
0
Ok here we are. Now I know this is a video game thread, but we also know that some of us fall in love with this site even when games don't peak our attention. Some of us like to debate and share ideas, some of us enjoy discussion.

The debate threads are great but offer some problems. e.g. Trolling, popularity contests, attacking, ignorance and unfair odds at discussion due to social networks.

So I did some talking with POCKETS, who is willing to assist if intrests are there. We have decided it would not be a bad idea to set up organized debating. I will give a brief example of how this could work.

Topics could be picked by people, teams, mods, or even indifferent outsiders for a signed up debate. In this debate each side could hold forward a certain number or available entry positions for each side. The debates could have a certain length period for which they last before viewers can make comments afterwards regarding their opinions on the debate.

This would ensure a fair number of people on each side, and more regulate the trolling and negative attitudes by the people in the events due to its just more professional in itself.

SO, even if you do not like me, please post your intrests if you might consider enjoying, watching or participating in such a setup and perhaps we can one day create debate teams to go along with it. :neomon:
 
I would enjoy it. This makes it an actual debate rather then people flaming back and forth.
 
I agree with Cali. Most debates will have some little comments directed to the other person that are less than nice. I would be interested :ryan:
 
This is not a bad idea my pal, but if there is going to be a rehaul of the method of debate, I think we should go all out.

For example, I think there needs to be more evidence/sources/ links used in people's posts. It can get irritating when someone provides numbers, facts, and research only to be countered by 'well in my opinion...' or 'from what I have seen in my own life...'
 
My Manic said:
This is not a bad idea my pal, but if there is going to be a rehaul of the method of debate, I think we should go all out.

For example, I think there needs to be more evidence/sources/ links used in people's posts. It can get irritating when someone provides numbers, facts, and research only to be countered by 'well in my opinion...' or 'from what I have seen in my own life...'
Click to expand...

Ah yea I agree with this. A real debate should feature more defined sources to back up information.

However, I would like to point out that this could be an developed undertaking for all kinds of debates ranging from religion, philisophy, history and events and w/e. Some debates call for information while others digest thoughts and perceptions. So it would vary debate by debate, I mean everoyne has their own styles, and it would be up to the debatists in the debate to address a lack of source or request for more.
 
I like this idea :lew: I might actually participate in these instead of just watching people go back and forth :P I agree with Licky, though, more evidence is required. You can't very well make a point without valid evidence. Well, you can, but no one has a reason to believe you now do they? :monster: I've followed quite a few debates on whether or not God exists, those get pretty heated :gasp:
 
Draklor said:
I like this idea :lew: I might actually participate in these instead of just watching people go back and forth :P I agree with Licky, though, more evidence is required. You can't very well make a point without valid evidence. Well, you can, but no one has a reason to believe you now do they? :monster: I've followed quite a few debates on whether or not God exists, those get pretty heated :gasp:
Click to expand...



Like I said I agree with this two, but also like I said it varies topic to topic. Some of the best debates I have ever seen are philosophy topic debates.

Its going good with peoples reacitions.

EVEN if you might not attend this, please feel free to post intrests in the idea regardless if you should have some. The more support the better.
 
I very rarely debate, only when a topic really interests me, but it sounds like a good idea.
Maybe it'll stop the flaming a bit :lew:
 
I think it's a good idea for the reasons stated above. I also share the misgivings stated above.

I will say, though, that I have a background in proper debate. If you need some help with setup/format/etc., let me know. :monster:
 
Should cameras be allowed in the courtroom?
Should teenagers get their drivers license earlier?
Should people be able to start drinking at age 18?
Should High Schools offer alternate training for those who do not intend on going to college instead of the same education?
Should religion be included in public schools? If we teach creationism, should we teach evolution and the others?
Given our large population, should we consider a limit on the number of children that people in the U.S. can have, like China?
Do video games and violent movies have a negative effect on children?
Should there be a cap on how much money presidential candidates spend on their campaigns? If so, what?
Is the death penalty cruel or unusual punishment or the right punishment?
Should the U.S. government continue to aid other countries or help our own?
Should the U.S. continue to buy energy (oil and natural gas) from other countries or drill for our own?

Here are a list of potential starting topics. If anyone has any others please introduce them. Hopefully I can get a good idea of what topic might be good for testing this idea. Please throw out your opinions on what yall think a good introdutory debate could be.
 
There are two things I don't really get however, what did you mean by 'popularity contests'. I'm not really sure how you think someone's popularity has an affect on the current debates

As well as trolling and flaming(which I have seen none of myself, I think people are just offended when people strongly disagree but whatevs) how will this neutralise it?
 
My Manic said:
There are two things I don't really get however, what did you mean by 'popularity contests'. I'm not really sure how you think someone's popularity has an affect on the current debates

As well as trolling and flaming(which I have seen none of myself, I think people are just offended when people strongly disagree but whatevs) how will this neutralise it?
Click to expand...


People often takes friends sides, and most people agree there is a lot of trolling and flaming. The aim is to create debates with a professional manner (which you have), and have a decent mature debate about things. The debates will feature more guidlines about offences which I am also going to present to everyone. On the plus side it will not be one side, but rather equal people on opposing sides, which prevents from desperation or feeling smothered. Assaulting with knowledge will be ok by a certain extent, however personal assualts regarding anything else will not.

The goal is to create a topic in which equal amounts of people from either side debate with each without the feeling of crucifiction. People can even debate sides they are not truly on. We want to give the it the feeling of complete strangers having a fair and decent discussion, while the rest of the forum poses as an audience. Its brings the essence of debate rather then just being right.

THE BIGGEST benifit is that you can choose your debates...if there is someone you don't care for...then don't join =)
 
I am down with this, it can't hurt to try this format.

For a more "fun" topic why not just dive right in (and I know some of these are lame)-
"Which is a better game FF7 or FFX?"
"Which is the best final fantasy?"
"Who is the greatest hero in ff?"
 
I doubt people will argue on serious issues because their pals are doing it, that seems like an incorrect observation. I guess the flaming might occur a bit, some people may be dismissive and contemptuous.

How do these teams get chosen each time, first come first serve?
 
I believe Rydrum might just be on to something. The test debate could regard a final fantasy game, something of a lighter or more fun nature.


As for lickys question I feel that we can place topics into a weekly vote as to which topic we should do. After taking the vote we can place sign ups for the opposing sides.

As for voluteered debates, they can be pre organized or discussed by a team of friends or w/e and then issure their own sign up for the poulace to fill the missing places.

Organization might possibly be sloppy at the beginning, but hopefully everything can catch on and it can adapt and evolve over time. We will try out best to make it the best.

We can issue debates to last 1 week excluding the public. After it ends we can allow the populas to place their comments and thoughts on the debate. Also I figure 1 week for topic selection (most likely no more then two per week at the start), and 1 week for signups, or less when it gets rolling.
 
I'm willing to try it. I always end up in some form of debate somewhere. I haven't seen too much trolling in my time here, but it does happen in the more heated threads, though not blatantly.
 
Rydrum2112 said:
I am down with this, it can't hurt to try this format.

For a more "fun" topic why not just dive right in (and I know some of these are lame)-
"Which is a better game FF7 or FFX?"
"Which is the best final fantasy?"
"Who is the greatest hero in ff?"
Click to expand...


Ok getting down to brass tax. WHO ELSE, would volunteer in a debate for a topic such as one of these?

I think it would be a good start. I think the comparison of quality between two FF games... please offer suggestions
 
Would this get it's own sub forum or would it just be in the sleeping forest to prevent flaming? So basically teams for each debate are based on which side you take for the debate I'd assume? This should be fun :lew:
 
Draklor said:
Would this get it's own sub forum or would it just be in the sleeping forest to prevent flaming? So basically teams for each debate are based on which side you take for the debate I'd assume? This should be fun :lew:
Click to expand...

Well if we get enough sponsorship from the forum I can only conceive that it would be possible hopefully. This is something Pockets would have to investigate, because I am not a mod or admin.
 
How would the teams work? Would the teams form for each debate, since people in a team are unlikely to share the views on the same side of a debate for every topic (and if they do, then that suggests some issues there). I suppose that the teams would be composed after the topic has been announced, but then you stated that teams might choose the next topic.


Anyway, it is not a bad idea.
I don’t think that it should take over all of debating on the forum though. The idea of teams and an audience sounds great (unless this causes people to conform their beliefs to fit a single united viewpoint), but of set time periods and places for the debate, I think people not signed up may want to get involved and have opinions on a matter too. So regular threads should still exist and continue to be made, with special teamed debate threads being separate.

As for evidence and sources.. I understand and agree with the need for this, however not everyone has internet sources to hand, or perhaps they have read books years back about it (/ etc, depending on what is being debated), as opposed to internet articles. It’s true that people could try and fish the internet to find this information again, but it isn’t always going to be possible. With regular debating I wouldn’t mind that much if an argument was still well made and sensible. I can understand the need to press this harder for the team debate threads. However, I don’t think it would be easy to enforce this on the forum as we’d then have only a few posters who are likely to be experts on a particular topic (though that depends upon what it is, I suppose). I also find that sometimes the figures and sources can be interpreted in different ways, so opinions are, to me, just as important, as are life experiences – so long as it is accepted that that is what they are.

Debates are largely slow moving anyway, but we’ll have seen it with a few threads that when sources are recited and opinions or interpretations are considered of little value, then it is static and no longer a debate. It needs both. Sometimes one person in a thread can state all the facts, but there may be room for opinion in the interpretation of these facts, or in the discussion of their relevance. So long as their presence is considered and not just ignored and countered with “But in my opinion the world is flat, and the moon is a pancake stuck on the ceiling”, then I don’t see a problem with not reciting lots of figures in every post, and repeating these same figures in every post from then on.

Again, with the team debates idea – I like it. I mainly want to know how teams would be set up.



EDIT - Ah. While I typed this my question was answered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top