Announcement: Debates in the Gahzette [Archive]

Sigurd

10-12-2007, 10:43

Good day to all of you Backroomers.

The editor and I would like to try to do a monthly piece in the Gahzette where two of you would compete against each other in the art of debate.

The purpose of this thread is to firstly make an invitation to those of you who would be interested in participating and secondly to ask for good topics in debate.

So, who would be interested in participating and what topics should be debated?

Post either your interest in participation or a topic you would love seen being debated… or both.
There will be a panel of three referees who will determine the outcome and announce a winner in each debate.

The process of organising this debate has started and hopefully it will make the December issue of the Gahzette.
The Panel of referees will consist of me, sapi and one of you.
I am putting up the lists of topics and participants in this post and you can monitor it to check how things are progressing.

We have as of now the following proposed topics:

Abortion
Gun Rights/ Gun Control
Global Warming; man made or not?
What to do in Iraq?
The Israel – Palestinian conflict
int. peacekeeping operations
Socialised medicine
Smoking ban: yes or no?
Halo3

The members who have been willing to participate are:

Kamikhaan [What to do in Iraq? - xx]
Crazed Rabbit [Hand guns- pro] - Debate finished
{BHC}KingWarman888 [Gun control - pro?]
Beirut [socialised medicine - pro]
Inca [Global warming - yes]
RoadKill [Global warming - no, War in Afghanistan -xx]
Kukrikhan [any subject]
Bopa the Magyar [The Israel – Palestinian conflict – xx]
Louis VI The Fat [THE WALLOON MINORITY IN BELGIUM - flemish nationalist] - Debate in process
Waldinger [Hand guns - against] - Debate in finished
Andres [THE WALLOON MINORITY IN BELGIUM - francophobe] - Debate in process
Decker [the palestinian conflict - xx]
Don Corleone [any subject]
Bopa the Magyar [the palestinian conflict - xx]
Jimbob [Does God exist? - theist]
Sigurd Fafnesbane [Does God exist? - theist] (stepping in for Jimbob) - proposition is written and ready for submitting.

The - xx is an indication that no angle for discussion is defined.

What we need are more participants and the topics they would like to debate. We would like to pair opposing views in a debate so an indication on which side you would like to debate would be appreciated.

Sigurd (Gahzette)

naut

10-12-2007, 11:03

Abortion. :wink:

But, seriously, this sounds good, I'd love to read this in the gahzette when/if done.

Pannonian

10-12-2007, 11:07

I'd like to see Tribesman against one of the Americans.

:book: :dizzy2: :idea2: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :smash: :whip: :wall: :wall: :laugh4: :laugh4: :help:

Stig

10-12-2007, 11:11

I second Pann

tho Fragony tends to be "amusing" as well :bounce:

Tribesman

10-12-2007, 11:13

I'd like to see Tribesman against one of the Americans.

Firstly I don't do debates , I just rip the piss . Secondly "one of the a Americans" is very broad category , one could even say it is a generalisation .

Pannonian

10-12-2007, 11:18

Firstly I don't do debates , I just rip the piss . Secondly "one of the a Americans" is very broad category , one could even say it is a generalisation .
It's not the debate that amuses me, but their reaction to you, and most of them, with one or two exceptions, react the same way.

Fragony

10-12-2007, 11:23

I wouldn't call saying bollox debating either, I'll give you that

naut

10-12-2007, 11:36

Hmmm... :prods DevDave into spotlight:.

Tribesman

10-12-2007, 12:56

I wouldn't call saying bollox debating either, I'll give you that

ah well that would be debateable .
It is a word that sums up much and is a clear and absolute response to the content of someone elses statement .
It also happens to be the word that one of our poltical party leaders over here says is his favourite word to use in debates in the Dail .
So since it is used by leaders of the opposition and by our "illustrious" leader in debates concerning the government of this country it appears that either you have just lost the debate or I just ripped the piss out of the content of your post ...or perhaps both .:2thumbsup:

Seamus Fermanagh

10-12-2007, 12:56

Rabbit v JAG on Gun rights/gun contol.

Who'll stand as seconds? :laugh4:

woad&fangs

10-12-2007, 13:11

Rabbit v JAG on Gun rights/gun contol.

Who'll stand as seconds? :laugh4:
Seconded

seireikhaan

10-12-2007, 13:27

Like an actual debate? Sure, I'm willing to go.

Crazed Rabbit

10-12-2007, 14:44

Rabbit v JAG on Gun rights/gun contol.

Who'll stand as seconds? :laugh4:

I'm down.

Seriously, I wouldn't mind doing a gun rights debate with someone.

Other fun topics (not for me) might include Global Warming; man made or not?

What to do in Iraq?

And for lots of fun: The Israel-Palestinian conflict.

CR

naut

10-12-2007, 14:49

And for lots of fun: The Israel-Palestinian conflict.
Give me a front-row ticket to see that one!

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

10-12-2007, 15:09

I'm done for a Gun Control Debate, but that about it I will do. :yes:

Husar

10-12-2007, 15:27

Ok, it's CR vs. Warman over gun control...

So warman takes the contra gun control side and CR... :laugh4:

InsaneApache

10-12-2007, 15:38

If there's a Tony Blair, genius or madman? debate, who on Earth can we ask to be the proposer? :laugh4:

Ayachuco

10-12-2007, 15:42

So I'm guessing this will be Cross-Examination style of debate with an affirmative side (w/burden of proof) and the negative side(stat quo) that will be 5 rounds (each round consists of one side proving their case or refuting/backing up their case) long with a period of cx between sides. And the last round being the summation round? Are you going to have topicality blocks or shells to test the validity of the subject? And they said I never paid attention in debate class...take that Mr. Ramsden.
Edit:as for the topic, I would like to see a gun control debate. My team didn't do very well with that topic but we kicked some UN butt w/ the topic about intl. peacekeeping operations

Beirut

10-12-2007, 19:48

And for lots of fun: The Israel-Palestinian conflict.

CR

Can I bring George & Martha to watch? :hide:

If there's one on socialized medicine, I'd be happy to take the communist, I mean socialized point of view.

HoreTore

10-12-2007, 19:56

If there's one on socialized medicine, I'd be happy to take the communist, I mean socialized point of view.

If ever there is a need for a commie...

Caius

10-12-2007, 22:45

What about the globalization? I would want to be on that one!

Crazed Rabbit

10-12-2007, 23:14

Can I bring George & Martha to watch? :hide:

If there's one on socialized medicine, I'd be happy to take the communist, I mean socialized point of view.

They'd have to be muzzled. No comments from the peanut gallery! ~;p

CR

AntiochusIII

10-13-2007, 01:38

You people are boring.

Popular topics are already popular, no need to waste Gahzette space on something like that. Debate about something craaazy or fun instead, yeesh. :shame:

...

:wacky:

Boyar Son

10-13-2007, 02:10

Tribes vs sfts

roswell incident

Devastatin Dave

10-13-2007, 02:30

Hmmm... :prods DevDave into spotlight:.
Unfortunately they probably won't allow my :daisy: retort. :no:

EDIT: Correct Dave, I won't. BG :grin:

Incongruous

10-13-2007, 05:50

Zionism's conquest of Palestine would be my choice.

CountArach

10-13-2007, 05:54

If ever there is a need for a commie...
Hehe, I would pay to see HoreTore vs anyone on a Socialist topic.

Pannonian

10-13-2007, 06:19

Hehe, I would pay to see HoreTore vs anyone on a Socialist topic.
Horetore vs Ice

CountArach

10-13-2007, 07:03

Now there is a matchup I would want to see!

Sigurd

10-13-2007, 12:33

I have started updating the opening post with the proposed topics and the members who are interested in participating.

We haven't made an absolute decision on how the mechanics will be in this.
What we would like is an opening statement from both participants stating their view (affirmative). This would be their proposition that underlines their view and why.

In round two there will be a chance for them to make comments on the opponent’s proposition. I guess the panel will decide who goes first. The first out will make comments on his/her opponents opening statement and the second out will have the chance to make comments on both his/her opponents opening statement and the opponent’s comments to his/her opening statement. We were thinking of a max 3 rounds, and whether this includes the concluding statement will be clear when we start this.

I doubt this will make it to the November issue of the Gahzette. But we plan for a great Christmas issue.

Many here mention the debate they would like to see. That is ok, but I can’t put up candidates other than those who have committed to participate. As of now there are only 3 members who has made the commitment.

The Debate I would have liked to see would have been Pindar vs. A.Saturnus on Does God exist? That would be a classical.

Kagemusha

10-13-2007, 12:39

RoadKill

10-13-2007, 13:43

I would like to participate, but preferbly about Global Warming. Is fake

Sigurd

10-13-2007, 13:52

updated...

For those whom I have listed with a topic. It would be nice if you made clear what side you would argue...
Thanks.

Any more takers?

Kralizec

10-13-2007, 15:31

This should be good :yes:

Topics: anything but global warming, really...

maybe add "smoking ban: yes or no?" to the list, too ~;)

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

10-13-2007, 23:50

Ok, it's CR vs. Warman over gun control...

So warman takes the contra gun control side and CR... :laugh4:

I am Pro Gun, I think Guns should be allowed in Society. :beam:

Crazed Rabbit

10-14-2007, 02:39

To clarify; yes, I'd be pro-gun rights/anti-gun control.

CR

CountArach

10-14-2007, 03:11

Really? I had no idea. :wink:

Crazed Rabbit

10-14-2007, 03:26

I know, it's a bit of a surprise, but I'd thought I'd mix it up a bit.
:beam:

CR

Louis VI the Fat

10-14-2007, 03:33

To clarify; yes, I'd be pro-gun rights/anti-gun control.
You...you are? ~:confused:

Thanks for clarifying, would never have guessed otherwise. ~D

I think the debators should step out of their usual roles. Not their opinions, but their debating prowess is at stake, no?

I suggest:

DevDave defending that 'The maltreatment of illegal Mexican immigrants is against the best interests of the USA'.

Fragony pointing out the 'Five Blessings, or Pillars, of the Multicultural Dream'.
For an ooponent, we want somebody who usually agrees with Fragony on most subjects. So I suggest Tribesy.

JAG 'Marx was a pseudo-scientific Charlatan'. Against, er...do we have any self-proclaimed anti-communists? No, wait. Pit the extreme lefties against one another, let's have a seventies style Marxism-Leninism pwns Trotskism-Luxemburgism and your Maoism-Bakuninism. JAG vs Idaho vs HoreTore.

Banquo's Ghost - 'The future is Middle Class'.

InsaneApache. Naturally, there can be only one topic: 'Not since the End of WWII has Britain Heaved such a Sigh of Relief as with the Long-Awaited Departure of Bolton Wanderers back into the Championship'.

*Let's hear others!*

CountArach

10-14-2007, 03:39

Pit the extreme lefties against one another, let's have a seventies style Marxism-Leninism pwns Trotskism-Luxemburgism and your Maoism-Bakuninism. JAG vs Idaho vs HoreTore.
That is awesome.

KukriKhan

10-14-2007, 03:48

updated...

For those whom I have listed with a topic. It would be nice if you made clear what side you would argue...
Thanks.

Any more takers?

IF there are no other volunteers to do so, for the purposes of furthering this effort to show off before the rest of the Org, the Backroomers' ability to fully examine and thoroughly debate any topic,

I put my name forward to provide an opposing voice to any proposition.

I'd rather see a non-staffer do this, but if Backroomers are shy, maybe I can humbly show the way. It's not about glory or shame, fellas, it's about showing the rest of the Org what we do back here - this place can pick apart every tiny nuance of a problem, hold it up to scrutiny, then put it back in its place in the bigger picture. We do this every day and week. Let's show the rest what we're proud of.

[/pep talk] :laugh4:

Louis VI the Fat

10-14-2007, 03:56

Oh alright then. For the glory of showing the rest of the .org what Backroom intellect is capable of, I shall cross wits with Kukrikhan on the proposition 'Halo 3 has teh awesomest graffix ever seen in gamewarez!!1!1woot!!'.

KukriKhan

10-14-2007, 04:12

RoadKill

10-14-2007, 04:15

Wait...

I've only got 1 wit. Can I borrow someone's?

I'll give you mine if you make me a moderator.:yes:

CountArach

10-14-2007, 05:02

I'll give you RoadKill's if you make me a Moderator.

seireikhaan

10-14-2007, 05:49

I'll do the one regarding what to be done in Iraq, though to make it a pro/con case, there would have to be a specific plan of action proposed, which would become the subject of the pro/con discussion.

CountArach

10-14-2007, 05:54

Actually Iraq could let you do a sort of panel thing, where you have someone who represents each of the following:

1. We need more troops in Iraq
2. What we have is fine and we should stay there
3. We should have a timetable for withdraw
4. We should leave now.

Or something like that.

Incongruous

10-14-2007, 07:42

In a few weeks I might be willing to discuss Israel's policies thus far in the occupied territories.
Any one interested?

Beirut

10-14-2007, 12:14

I think the debators should step out of their usual roles. Not their opinions, but their debating prowess is at stake, no?

We did that a bit last year, I think, people taking the contrary opinion. After a page or two some of the members were getting really weirded out and asked for it to stop. :laugh4:

Fragony

10-14-2007, 12:40

In a few weeks I might be willing to discuss Israel's policies thus far in the occupied territories.
Any one interested?

I'd like to see Pannonian on that one.

RoadKill

10-14-2007, 16:59

I would also like to debate the war in Afganistan, my point of view: Get the hell out.

Tribesman

10-15-2007, 01:57

poteen says argue on any subject for or against anythimng (apart from hglobal wrming )...though after tonight I might want to take socialised medicine off the list as wel ....though I might form new views over breakfast as I don't hink one ofmy guests is gonna rest onthe subject and her views will take some seriusr eflctioons against wha I had previously consideres

CountArach

10-15-2007, 02:36

Tribes... are you okay? I've never seen you type that poorly.

Marshal Murat

10-15-2007, 02:45

In my debate class....

We have 2 groups, and a resolution.
One group is Pro
Second group is Neg

The resolution would go something like...

This house believes that all that glitters isn't gold

Now, the Pro group defines
House - U.S. Government
all that glitters - Taxes
gold - shouldn't be raise
so it would read

The United States Government believes that taxes shouldn't be raised

Then the Pro defines
1.Judging Criteria
Taxes should not be raised.

Pro has to come up with a plan to prevent a tax increase, while neg tries to point out flaws and either come up with a counter-plan or say that the status quo is acceptable.

Do I need to clarify?

Pannonian

10-15-2007, 03:46

Tribes... are you okay? I've never seen you type that poorly.
He's drunk again.

Tribesman

10-15-2007, 03:47

Count , the reason is in the 4th word , bloody visitors , at least it sent them to bed in oblivion:2thumbsup: Normally its only for Christmas and funerals .

edit...
He's drunk again.

was drunk again , a bit of soakage turns drunk into not quite sober .

CountArach

10-15-2007, 04:56

He's drunk again.
I assumed so.

Sigurd

10-15-2007, 17:55

Maybe the debate system could be same kind as they have in TWC, a fightclub. The system works in a way where a Orgah would challenge another one in debating duel.I think it would be interesting read, since if someone wants to debate with certain named other individual, usually they dont share the same opinion about the subject.:smash:

I had a quick view at the fight club in TWC (thank you for the link Pannonian). I guess we could do something similar here. But I would have to persuade Tosa to make a subforum for it. For now we should try to get one or two going.

The obvious choices are:
Inca (it's happening)vs. RoadKill (it's not happening) on Global warming
Beirut (pro)vs. Kukrikhan (against)on socialised medicine

@Bopa the Magyar & kamikhaan: You have the opportunity to angle your topics any way you want and find an opponent.
@Marshal Murat: you seem to know a thing or two about debate. Would you be interested in participating?

Ok this will be the rules for this session:

One of the debates will make the december issue of the Gahzette (1000's of readers :yes: ).
This is a formal debate and you have to address the issue and not the persons arguing.
Every debate will start with an opening statement from both participants (300 - 400 words) outlining their view. Make sure you address your view and not why other views are false.
The debators will pm me these opening statements. I will then pm their opponent's opening statement. The first one to reach my pm box will go first and and make a reply to the opening statement. The next will have to wait for the opening statement and the first reply before making a reply. There will be another round of replies and then a closing remark before a panel of 3 will decide the outcome.

These debates will be known as (e.g.): the Beirut vs. Kukri on Socialised medicine. and hopefully recorded in a dedicated subforum to the Backroom for future reference.

Do we have a confirmation on the three proposed debates?

Beirut

10-15-2007, 18:31

Beirut (pro)vs. Kukrikhan (against)on socialised medicine

But I like Kukrikhan. :embarassed:

How can I have glee in my heart when utterly destroying someone I respect? (Besides, Kukri is far too intelligent to believe in for-profit health care anyway. Is he stepping in because no one else will?)

Crazed Rabbit

10-15-2007, 20:18

I won't debate tribesman.

I don't find the idea of getting involved in some farcical debate on semantics appealing.

Crazed Rabbit

Beirut

10-15-2007, 21:53

I won't debate tribesman.

I don't find the idea of getting involved in some farcical debate on semantics appealing.

Crazed Rabbit

Care to dance with me on communism in the medical field if Kukri isn't really in to it? :evil:

Husar

10-15-2007, 22:36

Maybe I should debate with Tribesman about whether or not God exists. ~D

Or any other topic would be fine, but don't expect any sources, he refuses to give them and I have none. :laugh4:

Oh and we both like smileys. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
:yes:

Seriously, I'm out. :hide:

But the idea sounds interesting.

Louis VI the Fat

10-15-2007, 22:58

I vote for the battle of the mods! :duel:

Should be legendary.

But does Kukri have any affinity with social darwinistic healthcare? Maybe CR would be the better sparring partner on this subject?

Crazed Rabbit

10-15-2007, 23:46

Care to dance with me on communism in the medical field if Kukri isn't really in to it? :evil:

Well, I certainly haven't got the experience in that field that I've got on gun rights. I'm open to anyone else who wants to have a go at gun rights.

Eh? Eh? Now's the time what for all you 'civilized' folks to step up to the plate and put your money where your mouth is vis a vis your anti-gun opinions.

CR

Beirut

10-15-2007, 23:49

Well, I certainly haven't got the experience in that field that I've got on gun rights. I'm open to anyone else who wants to have a go at gun rights.

Eh? Eh? Now's the time what for all you 'civilized' folks to step up to the plate and put your money where your mouth is vis a vis your anti-gun opinions.

CR

I'm almost tempted, but I'll stick with my commie medicine topic I guess.

RoadKill

10-16-2007, 01:12

300 - 400 word introduction?!! You have to remember that others have homework and assignments and projects and extra-curricular activities.

CountArach

10-16-2007, 04:35

Then they shouldn't sign up. That's what is stopping me - that and a complete lack of ideas about what to debate for.

KukriKhan

10-16-2007, 05:29

But I like Kukrikhan. :embarassed:

How can I have glee in my heart when utterly destroying someone I respect? (Besides, Kukri is far too intelligent to believe in for-profit health care anyway. Is he stepping in because no one else will?)

I like you too, my esteemed comrade. :)

Anytime, any place, any topic, any side. I'm happy to practice debating - it has been a long time. I still think our first debating effort would be best displayed by non-backroom staff.

That said, Sigurd Fafnesbane generously volunteered his time and effort to lead this project, and provide its administration. In respect of that, whatever he decides, I not only concur, but also wholeheartedly support that work, in any way he sees fit.

@Louis: I haven't forgotten; you 'n me, HALO3, in the right place, at the right time, mon ami. :)

Sigurd

10-16-2007, 07:51

300 - 400 word introduction?!! You have to remember that others have homework and assignments and projects and extra-curricular activities.

If you can do it in less I would be impressed. (BTW OP is 337 words).

I would really like to see at least one debate playing out.
If that means a friendly match between Beirut and Kukri is the means to get this thing going then ...
I am expecting your introductions gentlemen.

I will be happy to go against you Husar on the Does God exsist if you dare... :beam: and you can choose which side you want to argue.

Tribesman

10-16-2007, 20:22

I won't debate tribesman.

I didn't realise tribesmen was one of the subjects for debate .

Hey Pann when you wrote this...
It's not the debate that amuses me, but their reaction to you....was that one of the reactions you envisaged ?

Oh wellhttp://www.jilldaniels.com/Run%20Rabbit%20Run.htm

Crazed Rabbit

10-16-2007, 20:29

And...I rest my case.

CR

Tribesman

10-16-2007, 20:45

You rest your case:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

I don't find the idea of getting involved in some farcical debate on semantics appealing.

Now tell me Rabbit , your fondness for the second and the relevance you think it has . Wasn't all the discussions about what wording to use and all the alterations to the wording just about semantics , hasn't all discussion since then on the meaning and intent of the second been semantics ...lots and lots of talking about what the words mean eh , since beore it was passed right up until the present....funny how you can claim that it is clear and can only be interpreted one way .:dizzy2:

BTW Didn't you like the song ? it did have a gun in it :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Banquo's Ghost

10-16-2007, 20:49

Let's not derail the thread. :beadyeyes2:

Marshal Murat

10-16-2007, 20:56

Sigurd

10-17-2007, 08:20

I would like to be involved in the debate, yes.

Also, rather than have opening statements for both sides, it go...

Opening statements by Pro - Bring up points of discussion and sources
Opening statements Against - Refute points and sources, bring up your arguments
Rebuttal by Pro
Rebuttal by Against
Against Closing Statements - Argue your case, point out significant points
Pro Closing Statements - Argue your case, and close the debate.
The first two statements reveals sources and their arguments that they have to use through the rest of the debate.
My idea was that we open a locked thread about Socialized medicine, and the two debaters. The two debaters pm the arguments to the judge, who posts them in the locked thread. The thread can go on until there is a decision by the panel of who the winner is.

At the end the reviews by the panel are submitted to the Gahzette, declaring the winner.

Yes, you have some good ideas and I bet you are better at this than I.
However, I feel that it would be better if both candidates had a go at actually putting forth their proposition without being distracted by his/her opponent’s proposition. That’s why I would like to have both propositions in before they start arguing against their opponent. If this means we need an extra round of replies, so be it.
If there is enough interest in this we might get a subforum for it and then we can play out your scenario with a locked thread and the mechanics you described.

*****

We have as of now the following proposed topics:

Abortion
Gun Rights/ Gun Control
Global Warming; man made or not?
What to do in Iraq?
The Israel – Palestinian conflict
int. peacekeeping operations
Socialised medicine
Smoking ban: yes or no?
Halo3
Does God exist?

The members who have been willing to participate are:

Kamikhaan [What to do in Iraq? - xx]
Crazed Rabbit [Gun control - pro]
{BHC}KingWarman888 [Gun control - pro?]
Beirut [socialised medicine - pro]
Inca [Global warming - yes]
RoadKill [Global warming - no, War in Afghanistan -xx]
Kukrikhan [any subject]
Bopa the Magyar [The Israel – Palestinian conflict – xx]
Louis VI The Fat [Halo3 – xx]
Sigurd Fafnesbane [Does God exist? - Yes/No]
Marshall Murat [any subject?]

The - xx is an indication that no angle for discussion is defined.

Alright fellow debaters, I hope your interest is still alive.
I would really like to get at least one of these going as a kick off. I am putting myself in the list to better the chances and I will debate the topic listed as a theist or an atheist.

Take a look at the list. These are those who are willing. Now is the time to make a challenge.
If any of you readers want to have a go against any of these, post your interest here.
There are some restrictions though.

Tribesman can’t challenge CR.
A staff member can’t be in the first debate.
If enough interest is apparent I bet we could make something like TWC’s fight club here. And btw… the TWC have a standing challenge against us. I feel we need to at least prove that we are capable to do our own thing before venturing outside our forum looking for fights.

sapi

10-17-2007, 08:26

I would like to be involved in the debate, yes.

Also, rather than have opening statements for both sides, it go...

1. Opening statements by Pro - Bring up points of discussion and sources
2. Opening statements Against - Refute points and sources, bring up your arguments
3. Rebuttal by Pro
4. Rebuttal by Against
5. Against Closing Statements - Argue your case, point out significant points
6. Pro Closing Statements - Argue your case, and close the debate.

The first two statements reveals sources and their arguments that they have to use through the rest of the debate.
My idea was that we open a locked thread about Socialized medicine, and the two debaters. The two debaters pm the arguments to the judge, who posts them in the locked thread. The thread can go on until there is a decision by the panel of who the winner is.

At the end the reviews by the panel are submitted to the Gahzette, declaring the winner.I think we'll aim for a fully published version this time; and take a look at the threads idea at a later stage.

In addition, I'm very strongly of the opinion that both opening statements should be in the affirmative, so that's not really going to change.

Real life debating is a very different beast to this, and a clear statement of claim (not one put in the last few lines after rebutting the opposition argument for 350 words) is essential to highlighting the sort of fallacies that we're looking for.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

10-17-2007, 15:23

I want to Play with Tribes about Gun Control :beam:

Andres

10-17-2007, 15:27

I'd like to see a debate between Gregoshi and Whacker about bad puns :grin:

Fragony

10-17-2007, 16:13

I am here for the chicks really

Beirut

10-17-2007, 23:39

I am here for the chicks really

The winners get the chicks.

What shall we debate, then? :evil:

Incongruous

10-19-2007, 06:38

Which is better.
Milk or Dark Chocolate?
A debate I feel has been on the minds of every member for at least five years now.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

10-19-2007, 14:05

Which is better.
Milk or Dark Chocolate?
A debate I feel has been on the minds of every member for at least five years now.

Milk. Milk, Plus Salted Cashews.......:yes:

So Tribes, you up for it :beam:

Sigurd

11-09-2007, 12:55

*BUMP*

Reviving this thread now that the Gahzette is out.

WE NEED PARTICIPANTS FOR A DEBATE!!!!

Are there none that will take the challenge? There are no members in the Backroom that are up for this? :whip:

Andres

11-09-2007, 14:52

I'd like to debate about Belgium and to be more particular about the francophone inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde.

To gain a different perspective on the matter for myself, as a Fleming, I will (surprise, surprise!) defend the Walloon/francophone points of view on this matter. In particular I'd like to discuss the following:

a) should the french speaking inhabitants of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde have the right to be treated in their own language by government institutions (évidemment!);
b) should the french speaking inhabitants of Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde have the right to vote for Walloon/Brussels political parties (bien sur!);
c) Should there be more tax money available to spend in Bruxelles-Hal-Vilvorde on french education, walloon/french culture, french libraries and the developpement of the french language in Flanders (oui, oui, oui!).
d) should the towns of Sint-Genesius-Rode, Wemmel, Drogenbos, Linkebeek, Kraainem en Wezembeek-Oppem belong to the Brussels Region (mais enfin, pourquoi pas?!).

My favourite opponent on this matter would be Louis VI the Fat, who has to defend the Flemish (preferably flemish-nationalistic) points of view on these matters.

doc_bean, peasant phill, Moros, Conradus or any other Belgian opponent would be nice as well.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

11-09-2007, 14:57

Louis VI the Fat

11-09-2007, 17:39

I'd like to debate about Belgium and to be more particular about the francophone inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde.

To gain a different perspective on the matter for myself, as a Fleming, I will (surprise, surprise!) defend the Walloon/francophone points of view on this matter.

My favourite opponent on this matter would be Louis VI the Fat, who has to defend the Flemish (preferably flemish-nationalistic) points of view on these matters. How can I possibly resist? :laugh4: :laugh4:

I shall fiercely defend the brave Flemish nation in their righteous cause. :knight:

I already said earlier in this thread that debators defending the opposite of their usual positions would be most fun.

(This is all assuming, of course, that there is some general interest in the byzantine minutiae of Belgian regionalism. If we would only bore everybody to death, then let's just open a thread about this It's too good to pass up upon. :2thumbsup: )

Crazed Rabbit

11-09-2007, 17:59

I'm still up for defending gun rights. Or is no one up to the task of going against me?

CR

Louis VI the Fat

11-09-2007, 18:20

I would love to debate you, CR. You are one of my favourite posters in the Backroom. But not about guns - the subject simply bores me to death. :shrug:

Edit: but if I am going to enter a debate, I think I shall opt for Andres' offer. :laugh4:

Tribesman

11-09-2007, 18:56

I'm still up for defending gun rights.
Guns don't have rights .

Or is no one up to the task of going against me?
Are you going to be picky about who you feel that you might be competant enough to go up against ?

woad&fangs

11-09-2007, 19:00

I wouldn't mind the Belgium debate Between Andres and Louis. It definately would be a unique topic.

If CR really wants to debate gun control then I am willing to take him on.

Crazed Rabbit

11-09-2007, 19:41

Guns don't have rights .

I disagree. They all deserve a loving home.

Are you going to be picky about who you feel that you might be competant enough to go up against you?

Corrected. And yes, I am.

Besides, tribesy, we already debated guns recently. And you didn't seem up to the task of actually defending your views. :shrug:

If CR really wants to debate gun control then I am willing to take him on.

I don't want to nag anyone into feeling obligated to debating me. But if you'd like to...

CR

Tribesman

11-09-2007, 19:53

Besides, tribesy, we already debated guns recently. And you didn't seem up to the task of actually defending your views.
Was that the one where your "facts" were repeatedly shown to be of the non-factual variety and you attempted to attack a view that you clearly didn't have the faintest grasp of what concept it was you thought you were attacking:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

Csargo

11-09-2007, 20:07

Nevermind.

Andres

11-09-2007, 21:07

How can I possibly resist? :laugh4: :laugh4:

Damn, he's crazy enough to accept :laugh4:

I shall fiercely defend the brave Flemish nation in their righteous cause.

What Flemish nation?

The funny thing is, they don't even have a language. You can hardly state that "le Flamand" is a language. People living in Antwerp, don't understand people from Limburg and none of them understand people from West- or East-Flanders. What language is it you Flemings are always talking about :inquisitive:

Mind you, my esteemed opponent. I am well prepared. Due to the most recent evolutions in our country, I have started to read Le Soir and La Libre Belgique for the last few days and I have been watching the news broadcasts on RTBF - La Une :knight:

Oh, and in case you have "reasonable" proposals to actually "solve" certain issues, the answer is:

NON!

And maybe my esteemed opponent should start giving swimming lessons to his beloved flemings. Within 50 years there probably will no longer be such thing as Flanders :devil:

As you can see, I'm ready to face my opponent. Show me what you got frenchie flaminguant :boxing:

Sigurd

11-09-2007, 22:20

We need to try this consept...
Therefore I suggest that:

Andres and Louis prepare an affirmative proposition on their views. Andres will argue his points as a Walloon/francophone while Louis will argue as a flemish-nationalist.

Crazed Rabbit and Waldinger prepare an affirmative proposition on their views. CR will argue his points as pro gun whilst Waldinger will argue against guns.

Make your arguments in a pm and send them to me. As outlined earlier in this thread remember that it is in the affirmative. This means you have to actually argue for your position and not argue why the opposite view is wrong (you have the opportunity of doing this at a later stage).
We are hoping the opening statements will be in the ballpark of 300 words.

I will open a thread dedicated to your debate and with the help of the moderators lock it so that the only posts will be the debate between the two participants.
The exchange will be via pms sent to me.

Let’s start this shall we?

Crazed Rabbit

11-09-2007, 22:49

I accept. However, it will be a couple days before I can get in my first PM; my father is visiting in a couple hours for the weekend and that's a bit more important to me than the backroom.

EDIT: So will the debate be more defined or just 'guns are good' vs 'guns are bad'?

Oh, tribesy; why yes it was that debate where you did nothing but repeat that sentence, or variations thereof, over and over again, with no evidence and refusals to list anything more than vague references.

CR

woad&fangs

11-09-2007, 22:55

Just so you know in advance. I'm actually pro gun in real life but that will just make my victory even sweeter when I crush CR. Fear my contrarian ways!!!!!!!! :smash: :smash: :smash:

Louis VI the Fat

11-09-2007, 22:57

We need to try this concept...
Therefore I suggest that:

Andres and Louis prepare an affirmative proposition on their views. Andres will argue his points as a Walloon/francophone while Louis will argue as a flemish-nationalist.

I will open a thread dedicated to your debate and with the help of the moderators lock it so that the only posts will be the debate between the two participants.
The exchange will be via pms sent to me.

Let’s start this shall we?

I am sorry. Look, it is nice of Andres to have put all this effort into making this work, but now I do not want my comments in the same thread as Andres anymore. Andres had his time. I now demand two seperate threads.

Also, I want Panzerjaeger to come in and support me, for historical reasons. :wink3:

But seriuosly. Andres, we must choose: we do this seriously, or, we take sneaky stabs at each other while pretending to support our cause, or, we leave the serious Gahzette debate to CR and Waldinger and open a thread about our subject and have ourselves a complete riot there. Then all those other Walloons, doc_bean, peasant phill, Moros, Conradus, can join in. They are all unemployed anyway, so can do with some diversion...~;p

Sigurd

11-09-2007, 23:10

I accept. However, it will be a couple days before I can get in my first PM; my father is visiting in a couple hours for the weekend and that's a bit more important to me than the backroom.

Yes, consentrate on family during this weekend and return with a good propostion next week.

EDIT: So will the debate be more defined or just 'guns are good' vs 'guns are bad'?

Any way you like it. Be sure you and Waldinger have the same starting point. How about agreeing to a exact definition here?

Sigurd

11-09-2007, 23:12

... [bla bla bla]...

But seriuosly. Andres, we must choose: we do this seriously, or, we take sneaky stabs at each other while pretending to support our cause, or, we open a thread about it, leave the serious Gahzette debate to CR and Waldinger and have ourselves a complete riot there. Then all those other Walloons, doc_bean, peasant phill, Moros, Conradus, can join in. They are all unemployed anyway, so can do with some diversion...~;p

There are only one option... :whip:

woad&fangs

11-09-2007, 23:16

I would prefer that the topic be more specific such as whether handguns should be legal or not.

Sigurd

11-09-2007, 23:24

I would prefer that the topic be more specific such as whether handguns should be legal or not. Do you agree with this scope CR?

Andres

11-09-2007, 23:41

But seriuosly. Andres, we must choose: we do this seriously, or, we take sneaky stabs at each other while pretending to support our cause, or, we leave the serious Gahzette debate to CR and Waldinger and open a thread about our subject and have ourselves a complete riot there. Then all those other Walloons, doc_bean, peasant phill, Moros, Conradus, can join in. They are all unemployed anyway, so can do with some diversion...~;p

Meh, I can put forward serious and reasonable arguments for the statements I made. But I also want it to be fun, both for the participants as for the readers.

Can you agree with a mix of meanigful and serious arguments ('ius personae' versus 'ius sole' (just one example, don't want to show my opponent all my cards ~;) ...), spiced up a little (just a tiny little bit) with some typical Belgian stereotypes (the lazy Walloon vs the nationalistic Fleming or some other stereotypes, but let's keep it less exaggerated then what belgian extremists tend to produce)? Some emotion and passion in the debate will make it more enjoyable.

As a fan of fine cooking, you probably agree with me that a tiny little bit of well chosen spice make the difference between a decent meal and a fabulous meal.

Bonne chance Louis :bow:

Tribesman

11-09-2007, 23:46

Oh, tribesy; why yes it was that debate where you did nothing but repeat that sentence, or variations thereof, over and over again, with no evidence and refusals to list anything more than vague references.

Ah you mean the vague references to easily identifiable and verifyable facts that showed that what you had repeatedly claimed was true was indeed undeniably and indisputably false .:2thumbsup:
Falsehoods that you will most probably put forward again in your debate as "fact" , simply because without the falsehoods you stance falls apart :yes:

PanzerJaeger

11-10-2007, 00:07

Oh my god.

We all know you know exactly what debate you are both talking about so just stop referencing it to get in jabs that you couldn't during the actual debate! It really is mind-numbing to read through this otherwise entertaining thread.

Louis VI the Fat

11-10-2007, 00:29

Meh, I can put forward serious and reasonable arguments for the statements I made. But I also want it to be fun, both for the participants as for the readers.

Can you agree with a mix of meanigful and serious arguments D'accord. Bonne chance, Andres! :bow:

Et ius personae est 'le droit du sang', plus communément appelé, en latin, ius sanguinis. ~;p

Crazed Rabbit

11-10-2007, 00:39

Do you agree with this scope CR?

Yes, I think it's a good idea.

CR

woad&fangs

11-10-2007, 00:52

Ok, so

Crazed Rabbit believes that the handguns should be legal.

Waldinger "believes" that handguns should be made illegal.

:study:I need to find some sources now.

Decker

11-10-2007, 10:50

I'm not the greatest debater around(quite inexperienced as a matter of fact), but I'd like to try my hand at the
The Israel – Palestinian conflict. I hardly come to this side of the Org but I'd like to give this a shot.

Beirut

11-10-2007, 13:02

I stand ready to battle anyone, anywhere, anytime, regarding the righteousness of socialized health care vs. the despicable horrors of private medicine. :knight:

Fragony

11-10-2007, 13:09

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=94954

charge

Tribesman

11-10-2007, 15:32

We all know you know exactly what debate you are both talking about so just stop referencing it to get in jabs that you couldn't during the actual debate!
Nope its entertaining to remind Rabbit that he bases his arguements on falsehoods .

Decker

11-16-2007, 02:04

Where are we at with the debates? It just kinda died

woad&fangs

11-16-2007, 02:16

Don't worry, the Debates are not dead.

I can't speak for Louis and Andres but Me and CR have made are opening statements already. We are now scrutinizing each others opening statement and will PM Sigurd with our rebuttal very soon.

Decker

11-16-2007, 03:52

Is there a set format the the people at the Gahzette would like for us to use?

Sigurd

11-16-2007, 13:50

The two debates listed earlier has started.

The format is simple:
- Make an affirmative proposition for your view in the debate in aprox. 300-400 words.
- The debate is formal and you should look for and point out technical fallacies (ref. article in Gahzette issue 7)
- Point these fallacies out and rebut your oponent's views in a number of replies.
- One debator will start the rebutal and the other will follow suit (decided upon a coin toss).
- There will be a set number of rounds (max 4).
- A panel of three will make comments on the finished debate.

I will make a thread for each debate when round 2 (first rebuttal) has started.

Prodigal

11-16-2007, 15:22

Does "ur a n00b" and "you almost certainly have a beard" count as valid rebuttal's of someone elses stance on a particular topic?

Andres

11-16-2007, 15:31

Does "ur a n00b" and "you almost certainly have a beard" count as valid rebuttal's of someone elses stance on a particular topic?

Off course.

Did you really expect decent arguments, statistics backed up by trustworthy sources and scientific studies combined with the correct use of logic?

~:confused:

C'mon, what fun would that be?

Besides,

LOU!S' avatarz h4s 4 be4rd!1!1! ROFLOLZ PWN3D!1!1!

What's wrong with having a beard?

Vladimir

11-16-2007, 15:56

Why isn't (aren't you,) Beirut giving the anti-Israel argument?

Don Corleone

11-16-2007, 16:25

HoreTore

11-16-2007, 16:31

We really ought to have a squid discussion. Or aliens. Or both.

Decker

11-16-2007, 18:55

Prodigal

11-16-2007, 19:45

What's wrong with having a beard?

When I say beard, I'm talking leather elbow patches on tweed beneath which is a T-shirt, (with accompanying gut), that has, "real ale appreciations society chairman", printed on it. The wearer of which is stroking down a brill creamed comb-over, whilst reaching out the other hand for the yard glass.

'Nuff said.
:The end:

Moros

11-16-2007, 21:17

Damn, he's crazy enough to accept :laugh4:

What Flemish nation?

The funny thing is, they don't even have a language. You can hardly state that "le Flamand" is a language. People living in Antwerp, don't understand people from Limburg and none of them understand people from West- or East-Flanders. What language is it you Flemings are always talking about :inquisitive:

That's funny, as yesterday I talked with (a wasted) guy from West-Flanders I understood him perfectly and he also understood me. He said :" you're not too bad, even though you're from Limburg". Half hour later another guy I was talking with asked me if I was from West-Flanders. Lol.

verstoj't?

Viva la Belgique!

Tribesman

11-17-2007, 02:59

Crazed Rabbit believes that the handguns should be legal.

Waldinger "believes" that handguns should be made illegal.

:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

woad&fangs

11-17-2007, 03:37

Even funnier is the fact that I'm going deer hunting tomorrow.

Sigurd

11-17-2007, 04:45

In the spirit of debating clubs, I'll sign on for being a free-form player. I'll take any position on any argument, just give me a day or two to do some research on the issue and let me know what my position is.

If you've already signed everyone up, wonderful! I'll enjoy seeing it.

By the way, is it too late to suggest a debate topic? I think abortion gets too emotional and there's too much assumption of malintent by both sides.

But what about resurrecting the Terry Schiavo case, and have a topic on end-of-life decision making and who holds the ultimate authority?
I have put you down as a debater, Don.

As to the debates, there are only two committed (Andres vs. Louis and CR vs. Waldinger) and currently in process.
You can see in the OP what people have suggested for topics and what they would like to debate. There are however few commitments.
I would suggest that if you want to debate, you should challenge a member to a debate.
When your proposed opponent takes the challenge, a commitment to a debate has been established. Then you have to agree on an angle or scope of the debate. When this is done, you send in your affirmative proposition to me or sapi.

Yes you can propose new topics...

Tribesman

11-17-2007, 11:51

Even funnier is the fact that I'm going deer hunting tomorrow.
Whats funny is that you set the scope for the debate and set yourself a position that is unwinnable .

I would prefer that the topic be more specific such as whether handguns should be legal or not.

Peasant Phill

11-17-2007, 14:11

Where can I follow those debates or do I have to wait until the december issue of the ghazettah? I can't wait to hear Andres' and Louis' arguments.

PS can other people participate?

Sigurd

11-17-2007, 14:19

Where can I follow those debates or do I have to wait until the december issue of the ghazettah? I can't wait to hear Andres' and Louis' arguments.

PS can other people participate?
KukriKhan creates the threads that will host the debates... I will start filling them when round 2 has started.
CR and Waldinger are now in round 2 and I will send Kukri the material.

The threads will be closed, so no... only the debaters will be able to post there.

You can participate by putting your name down for a debate or challenge any of the members listed in the OP.

Tribesman

11-17-2007, 16:23

You can participate by putting your name down for a debate or challenge any of the members listed in the OP.
terms and conditions may apply , putting your name down does not neccesarily mean that you are willing to debate or are open to challenge:2thumbsup:

Viking

11-17-2007, 18:30

Halo 3? :gah:

HoreTore

11-17-2007, 22:03

Spork vs. Navaros on sex. That'd be the day.

woad&fangs

11-18-2007, 04:25

Whats funny is that you set the scope for the debate and set yourself a position that is unwinnable .
I actually think that I'm doing pretty good right now. I'll have to see rabbits rebuttal for a fair comparison of how we are doing but I'm not failing as much as I expected.

First snow of the year up here happened today during deer hunting. I shot a doe if anyone cares.

CountArach

11-18-2007, 05:12

On second thought... I'll remove this comment...

Husar

11-18-2007, 05:37

I shot a doe if anyone cares.
:furious3: :smg: :soapbox: :rulez:

Enjoy your meal! ~D

HoreTore

11-18-2007, 19:43

Excuse me, I must be blind. Where did those two threads go...?

Ronin

11-18-2007, 23:37

Spork vs. Navaros on sex. That'd be the day.

:laugh4:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v677/vincent_pt/threadGoing.jpg

KukriKhan

11-18-2007, 23:40

Not blind. :)

I removed them after Sigurd and I discussed how posting should happen. The next version you'll see will be started, then updated by he alone, so he can better control what they contain and how they look.

note: It will be helpful, after Sigurd starts those threads, if no one else posts in them, so that we end up with a product that exports well to the Gahzette and the wider internet. To that end, we'll likely delete any other comments, and provide a separate "debate-discussion thread" for us readers in the peanut gallery.

Andres

11-19-2007, 09:48

Sigurd, I've sent my opening statement to you on Wednesday...

What are we waiting for? A new Belgian government?

Or are we waiting for Louis :mean: ?

Sigurd

11-19-2007, 16:41

Or are we waiting for Louis :mean: ?
:yes:

Fragony

11-19-2007, 16:48

This is good stuff, if this becomes the standard I call out of my lague :2thumbsup:

edit, spelling, yup it is

Don Corleone

11-19-2007, 16:56

Okay, I've had a PM discussion going, and I'm ready to issue a challenge.

Hore Tore and I have frequently bantered about the merits of a state-run socialist economy versus a free-enterprise capitalistic economy.

I'd like to challenge Hore Tore to go on record in here. The premise: State-controlled socialist economies are ineffecient and cannot provide the same economic growth or standards of living that a free-enterprise capitalistic economy can and therefore ought to be avoided when possible.

I'll let Hore Tore chose which position he wants to take. :laugh4:

Note: <My challenge is about economic systems writ large, something Hore Tore & I have butted heads over frequently. I'm not trying to co-opt the socialized medicine topic. The particulars of socialized medicine versus private-payer medicine are such that I think it ought to be argued separately>.

Redleg

11-19-2007, 17:30

The challange in such a debate Don that you have chosen is to avoid the emotional appeal arguement until the end of the debate.

Don Corleone

11-19-2007, 17:34

The challange in such a debate Don that you have chosen is to avoid the emotional appeal arguement until the end of the debate.

I think that's true on any of these. But you're right. I'll do my best to remain detached, and I was serious about arguing either side of an issue. Debating isn't about being right, necessarily, it's about bringing information to the table in an orderly, logical fashion. There's a lot of logical evidence to make on behalf of socialist economies.

And in case your point is that my premise was a bit leading, I've ammended it. :2thumbsup:

Redleg

11-19-2007, 17:40

That reads better Don for a debate.

My main thought behind the statement is that a socialist/capitalist debate often boils down to an emotional based arguement here in the .Org. The longer the emotional appeals are left out of the discussion the better the debate will be. So I must wish you good luck in your endevor.

HoreTore

11-19-2007, 18:12

Fragony

11-19-2007, 18:38

Hmmm, I think Horetore just went from being a socialist to a being a social-democrate, at least it's something.

HoreTore

11-19-2007, 20:20

Hmmm, I think Horetore just went from being a socialist to a being a social-democrate, at least it's something.

Nah, most socialists are in favour of a mixed economy, like the social democrats. It's just that we have a few more things on the state-list than the social democrats ~;)

Ice

11-19-2007, 20:32

HoreTore

11-19-2007, 20:36

You learn something new about a person every day :book: .

Hey, I've never said otherwise in my life! And I do believe I've stated my love for smaller businesses... it's just the big, old EvilCorp Inc. I don't like...

Don Corleone

11-19-2007, 20:41

Hum hum hum hum...

Well Don, two things;

1. What happened to morals?
2. I'm not in favour of a state-controlled economy... I'm a mixed economy man. So change it slightly(state controls the important stuff, market can deal with the rest), and I can do it. I seriously have no idea how to defend a full planned economy, so can't do that :clown:

I thought you said you didn't want to do the moral relativism vs. universal moral truths one. If you do, hey, I can oblige. You right erh, write the premise this time though.

*Not getting off to the best of starts here, now am I.... :stupido3:

Louis VI the Fat

11-19-2007, 20:49

Sigurd, I've sent my opening statement to you on Wednesday...

What are we waiting for? A new Belgian government?

Or are we waiting for Louis :mean: ?Hey, if it wasn't for Walloon obstruction there'd already be a new government. :whip:

Anyway, my Pm's written and send. Took me a while, I simply haven't been able to write anything constructive or meaningful lately. Going through one of those 'let's just spout nonsense everywhere' phases. :embarassed:

HoreTore

11-19-2007, 20:51

I thought you said you didn't want to do the moral relativism vs. universal moral truths one. If you do, hey, I can oblige. You right the premise this time though.

Was my ranting unclear? :laugh4:

I'll give you these two to choose from then:

1. moral relativism vs. universal truths
2. free market vs. restricted market

Unless you plan to be a number-cruncher in an economy debate... I'm too lazy to find a bunch of statistics myself, so that goes out the window :smash:

Don Corleone

11-19-2007, 20:59

Was my ranting unclear? :laugh4:

I'll give you these two to choose from then:

1. moral relativism vs. universal truths
2. free market vs. restricted market

Unless you plan to be a number-cruncher in an economy debate... I'm too lazy to find a bunch of statistics myself, so that goes out the window :smash:

You got it, you 'anything-goes' hippy, option 1 :hippy:

Since you didn't post one for it, I'll propse a premise.

It has been proposed that morality is a flexible, subjective virtue which depends heavily upon the circumstances of a particular situation. This view is in contrast to the more traditional view that there are in fact moral absolutes by which all persons must abide. Rather than the use of terms 'good' and 'evil' or 'right' and 'wrong', it would be preferable to use the terms 'appropriate' or inappropriate'.

Defending the position that morality is indeed relative and subjective is Hore Tore. Defending the position that there are absolute moral truths is yours truly.

Okay Sigurd, I think the glove's been tossed.

Fragony

11-19-2007, 21:00

Relative sounds relativliy broad for such a fixed ideoligy.....

HoreTore

11-19-2007, 21:36

You got it, you 'anything-goes' hippy, option 1 :hippy:

Since you didn't post one for it, I'll propse a premise.

It has been proposed that morality is a flexible, subjective virtue which depends heavily upon the circumstances of a particular situation. This view is in contrast to the more traditional view that there are in fact moral absolutes by which all persons must abide. Rather than the use of terms 'good' and 'evil' or 'right' and 'wrong', it would be preferable to use the terms 'appropriate' or inappropriate'.

Defending the position that morality is indeed relative and subjective is Hore Tore. Defending the position that there are absolute moral truths is yours truly.

Alrighty then! Oh, should we debate using our own opinions(in which case I fear a 'agree to disagree'), or should we be unreasonable debaters(think a Lenin vs. Reagan debate :laugh4:)?

Okay Sigurd, I think the glove's been tossed.

Aren't we supposed to smack each other?

Don Corleone

11-19-2007, 22:15

I don't think the idea is to see how much blood we can get in the water. That's how debates in the Backroom tend to go now, without any special formats. I think the idea is to take the premise that morality is relative and defend it. I'll take the position that morality is absolute and have to defend that. But I think we need our moderator (Sigurd) to really spell out the rules for us.

Husar

11-19-2007, 22:18

Going through one of those 'let's just spout nonsense everywhere' phases. :embarassed:
If it makes you happy, go on.
I do it myself and your "nonsense" certainly makes me laugh a lot! :2thumbsup:

Vladimir

11-19-2007, 22:37

Opening statement by Louis VI the Fat

Hello,

I, a member of the Vlaams Belang (‘Flemish Interest’ political party) and Andres, unemployed francophone Belgian, and would like to discuss the rights of the francophone inhabitants of Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde (BHV). Also known as Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde in English, or Brussel-Halle-Vilvoorde in French (since two weeks.)

:laugh4: It just got better from there. I know what I'm drinking tonight!

I enjoy your "knees bent running around" style of debate.

Translation: The French were openly mocked in the movie but came out on top. Sorry for all the French comments recently, I think I've gone international.

Sigurd

11-19-2007, 22:40

But I think we need our moderator (Sigurd) to really spell out the rules for us.
I am happy to oblige.

It started with an article on the Backroom found in issue 7 of the Gahzette. This article gives the basics of debates.
What the participants need to do is prepare an affirmative statement of the view they are going to debate. This means, you outline your view and why you think your view is correct. Do not argue why your opposition is wrong. You do that in the following rebuttals.
This is also a formal debate, meaning you can point out fallacies and technical faults in the rebuttals. If one debater calls the other an idiot, it is clearly an ad Hominem attack and points will be subtracted for that debater.
When I have received both opening statements I will pm them to your opposition.
One of the debaters will go first and prepare a rebuttal. The other will wait for the first and make a rebuttal based on the opponent’s opening statement and the opponent’s first rebuttal.
We want max 4 rounds.

That is;
Round 1 = opening statement
Round 2 = first rebuttal
Round 3 = second rebuttal
Round 4 = rebuttal and/or closing statements.

Send them by pm to me or Sapi
I will open a dedicated thread when I have received both opening statements.

Myrddraal

11-20-2007, 13:02

Sigurd

11-23-2007, 18:52

Will we have the option for speeches for and against the proposition after the main debate?

Perhaps at the end of the debate interested viewers could submit a speech for or against the proposition, and Sigurd (or perhaps the debaters) could choose two to be posted in the thread...

Just an idea. :bow:
Interesting ideas Myrddraal, we shall take them into consideration.

Now for the debate between Don and HTore.. have you agreed on an angle for your topic yet?

Don Corleone

11-23-2007, 20:30

Hi. Sorry for disappearing, but I'm away in the woods for Thanksgiving at my parents' cabin. I've only got dial-up, very slow at that, plus lots of family stuff going on. I'll be ready to go on Monday.

Thanks.

Sigurd

11-23-2007, 23:12

No worries Don...

I have been thinking and I would love having a go at a debate. I can't take on every topic as I would need to at least know a thing or two about it beforehand. Therefore I would like to debate something in the religious departement.
I know Jimbob has put his name on the list with religion as topic, but he can't do one right now.

I can take either the theist view or the atheist view. I am an agnostic so it wouldn't be too hard.
Anyone interested? I challenged Husar before, but he feels he isn't up to it.

Husar

11-24-2007, 00:31

Exactly.
I'm much better at spamming and inserting my random, not-really-thought-through comments into serious discussions to derail them.
Everybody has his profession. :sweatdrop:
I'm also very uncertain about theist topics and so on, I could argue against myself for both sides, would keep me occupied. :dizzy2:

woad&fangs

11-24-2007, 02:18

Update: I have sent in my final rebuttal/conclusion to Sigurd and CR so once CR does his final rebuttal/conclusion the debate will be over.

Caius

11-24-2007, 02:31

I will be happy if I could participate in one of the debates. Sadly, I don't have right something to discuss.

Odin

11-24-2007, 02:38

Exactly.
I'm much better at spamming and inserting my random, not-really-thought-through comments into serious discussions to derail them.

Wow, you really have come along way in the self evaluation department havent you Husar?

:flowers:

Louis VI the Fat

11-24-2007, 03:03

I could argue against myself for both sides, would keep me occupied. :dizzy2:But arguing against oneself is a sign of a critical mind! It shows that you can view subjects from different perspectives. :yes:

Louis VI the Fat

11-24-2007, 03:04

But arguing against oneself is a sign of a critical mind! It hows you can view subjects from different perspectives. :bow:
Have to differ with you there. I think it is a sign of a weak and feeble mind, incapable of thinking stuff through to its logical conclusion. :no:

Husar

11-24-2007, 03:09

Wow, you really have come along way in the self evaluation department havent you Husar?

:flowers:
It's part of my grand evil plan to take over the universe but sometimes I actually insert an honest opinion if that makes you happier.
And thanks for the flowers. :beam:

woad&fangs

11-24-2007, 03:52

Louis is hilariaous :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

gaelic cowboy

11-24-2007, 04:42

Interesting to note no one has asked to or proposed the old nugget of god is dead etc etc. Or what about a debate on the org itself or maybe on the totalwar games that created this board. Just a thought lads

HoreTore

11-24-2007, 04:48

Like.... Are blitzers the 1337 r0xx0s?

gaelic cowboy

11-24-2007, 05:09

How about a debate on something outrageous like we should all join the flying spaghetti monster religon or die :idea2:

Strike For The South

11-24-2007, 06:47

debate me on anything. ill win

HoreTore

11-24-2007, 07:04

debate me on anything. ill win

Ok then! How 'bout we debate whether Texas sucks or not, and I'll take the Texan side? :beam:

Crazed Rabbit

11-28-2007, 00:16

:sweatdrop:

Phew, finally done with my conclusion in the gun debate.

CR

Boyar Son

11-30-2007, 02:56

How about a debate on something outrageous like we should all join the flying spaghetti monster religon or die :idea2:

What? wether God exists or not?

The aethiests are coccy!

Sigurd

12-03-2007, 15:02

The panel of judges are currently discussing the Wladinger vs. CR debate and I can reveal that it will be the one which will be published in the december issue of the Gahzette (shocker!!).

The Andres vs. Louis the Fat debate is currently on hold as Andres needed more RL time.

The DonC vs. HoreTore debate should have started but I have not heard from either.

I really want to test my growing skills (still a babe) in debate and hereby challenges anyone who will take the atheist side in a Does God exist debate. I have nearly completed my opening statement as a theist in that debate. Anyone that will test their atheistic skills?

Andres

12-03-2007, 15:05

The Andres vs. Louis the Fat debate is currently on hold as Andres needed more RL time.

I'll do my best to pm you this week. Sorry for the inconvenience :bow:

I really want to test my growing skills (still a babe) in debate and hereby challenges anyone who will take the atheist side in a Does God exist debate.

Why don't you challenge anyone who will take the agnostic side?

Sigurd

12-03-2007, 15:36

Why don't you challenge anyone who will take the agnostic side?
Becuase I would agree wholeheartedly? :laugh4:
Nah, as an agnostic I have chosen the theist side. If another agnostic would want to debate me, he/she should take the atheist side. This is a black or white case, a Yes or No not "we don't know" debate.
Come on people, I know there are lot's of you that would say no to the question of Does God exist? Now you can argue your points.
I guess sapi or Kukri will moderate this debate.

Vladimir

12-03-2007, 16:14

The Yes or No side of this debate is childish. Since it can only be *known* to oneself the debate should focus on the consequences of the answer. Why is it important if there is a God (or not)? How would it affect your life if you changed your opinion from one to the other? The answer isn't important, only your reaction to it.

You'll find that any debate about the existence of the divine ultimately results in a debate about man; that's what it's all about.

ICantSpellDawg

12-03-2007, 16:18

Maybe I could do an overturn Roe v Wade debate? I have no formal training. This debate thing is a good idea.

Vladimir

12-03-2007, 18:34

That would be an interesting debate. I'd like to hear the counter to Roe's attempt to have it reversed. She claimed she was misled by her doctors. I never heard much of a follow-up to that story.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

12-04-2007, 03:52

I think a debate about Cyber schools (which I posted a thread about eariler), would be nice, but don't know if anyone would be up to it.

Also, Mabye a debate about wheneter or not there should be a set of rules in War, like the Geneva Convention.

What you guys think?

Sigurd

12-04-2007, 12:58

You'll find that any debate about the existence of the divine ultimately results in a debate about man; that's what it's all about.
I have made my proposition and I am not going to debate mankind. This is about the cosmos and its entities.

There have to be someone here with the knowledge to write a few lines on why God does not exist. :whip:

sapi

12-04-2007, 13:24

I have made my proposition and I am not going to debate mankind. This is about the cosmos and its entities.

There have to be someone here with the knowledge to write a few lines on why God does not exist. :whip:
Hell, I could probably do it, but that'd somewhat deplete our supply of judges, and defeat the purpose of a community debate :grin2:

Volunteers, people! :whip:

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

12-04-2007, 15:08

Hell, I could probably do it, but that'd somewhat deplete our supply of judges, and defeat the purpose of a community debate :grin2:

Volunteers, people! :whip:

You looking at one :beam: . Need something to keep me busy this Month, since vacation is coming soon :clown:

Caius

12-04-2007, 23:31

I will join for:

Global Warming, does it exist, or not?

I take the yay part.

Vladimir

12-04-2007, 23:31

I have made my proposition and I am not going to debate mankind. This is about the cosmos and its entities.

There have to be someone here with the knowledge to write a few lines on why God does not exist. :whip:

Any such argument is doomed to failure. A better question is why should we care?

Not my opinion mind you *eyes a dark cloud*.

Boyar Son

12-05-2007, 03:50

Becuase I would agree wholeheartedly? :laugh4:
Nah, as an agnostic I have chosen the theist side. If another agnostic would want to debate me, he/she should take the atheist side. This is a black or white case, a Yes or No not "we don't know" debate.
Come on people, I know there are lot's of you that would say no to the question of Does God exist? Now you can argue your points.
I guess sapi or Kukri will moderate this debate.

What? a debate wether God exists? whats the point, I (and the faithful) already know the Lord does!not insulting athiests

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

12-05-2007, 04:46

I will join for:

Global Warming, does it exist, or not?

I take the yay part.

I take the Nay Part:yes: . I don't think it exist at all.

sapi

12-05-2007, 05:05

I will join for:

Global Warming, does it exist, or not?

I take the yay part.
I hate to say it, but that stopped being a debate years ago ~;)

Cheetah

12-05-2007, 06:37

I really want to test my growing skills (still a babe) in debate and hereby challenges anyone who will take the atheist side in a Does God exist debate. I have nearly completed my opening statement as a theist in that debate. Anyone that will test their atheistic skills?

I can take the atheist side if the spot is still open.

Decker

12-05-2007, 09:12

:gah: I have to bow out of my debate due to school! Maybe somebody would like to take my place and engage Bopa The Magyar in a debate on the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict on the side defending Israel?

Sigurd

12-05-2007, 09:36

Any such argument is doomed to failure. A better question is why should we care?

Not my opinion mind you *eyes a dark cloud*.
This is like asking, why do we spend time here at the org? It is pure entertainment value. Besides I get to test my new skills at debate.
So you think it is doomed to fail? Better take a seat and watch then.

What? a debate wether God exists? whats the point, I (and the faithful) already know the Lord does!not insulting athiests
Well as a new born theist, we need to spread the word. It becomes everyone who has been warned to warn his neighbour. If a dam was about to break wouldn't you run through the village yelling: "The dam is breaking!!"?
Of course there are those foolish enough to not heed the warning.

I can take the atheist side if the spot is still open.
Ah, an .org elder. It would be honourable to test my skill against you sir. Since {BHC}... is doing the Global warming I guess the spot is open. I accept your challenge.

Make an affirmative proposition which will be your opening statement (about 400 - 500 words. I have already made mine which it is 479 words) and send it to either KukriKhan or sapi. One of them will open a thread when both opening statements have been received. I don't know if sapi has moderating powers here, if not Kukri would be the obvious choice.

Odin

12-05-2007, 13:50

Ah, an .org elder. It would be honourable to test my skill against you sir. Since {BHC}... is doing the Global warming I guess the spot is open. I accept your challenge.

For the record this debate between Sigurd and Cheetah has greatly piqued my interest.

I'd like to throw this out now before the actual debate occurs. Could we get a seperate discussion thread running concurrent with the debate that is highly moderated?

This would have a lot of value for the Backroom. Heck put forth specific rules for the discussion thread I dont care. This is one of those issues that has the potential to be more consilitory then devisive, we could use a couple of those here.

Just a thought... :idea2:

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88

12-05-2007, 14:40

This is like asking, why do we spend time here at the org? It is pure entertainment value. Besides I get to test my new skills at debate.
So you think it is doomed to fail? Better take a seat and watch then.

[/SIZE]
Well as a new born theist, we need to spread the word. It becomes everyone who has been warned to warn his neighbour. If a dam was about to break wouldn't you run through the village yelling: "The dam is breaking!!"?
Of course there are those foolish enough to not heed the warning.

Ah, an .org elder. It would be honourable to test my skill against you sir. Since {BHC}... is doing the Global warming I guess the spot is open. I accept your challenge.
Make an affirmative proposition which will be your opening statement (about 400 - 500 words. I have already made mine which it is 479 words) and send it to either KukriKhan or sapi. One of them will open a thread when both opening statements have been received. I don't know if sapi has moderating powers here, if not Kukri would be the obvious choice.

We can switch if you like m8 :yes:, don't matter to me :beam:

KukriKhan

12-05-2007, 15:29

For the record this debate between Sigurd and Cheetah has greatly piqued my interest.

I'd like to throw this out now before the actual debate occurs. Could we get a seperate discussion thread running concurrent with the debate that is highly moderated?

This would have a lot of value for the Backroom. Heck put forth specific rules for the discussion thread I dont care. This is one of those issues that has the potential to be more consilitory then devisive, we could use a couple of those here.

Just a thought... :idea2:

2 things:

1. My honorable colleague sapi doesn't have Mod tools here, so I'll pick up the ball. SigurdF and Cheetah, if you will therefore PM me your opening statements, I'll start a new debate thread.

2. Are there any objections to Odin's idea of a higly Moderated debate discussion thread? If not, we'll try it out. Once I've made the formal debate[u] thread, I'll also start a [u]debate discussion thread, where entries from the non-debaters will appear after being reviewed (by me). This means you won't get the instant gratification of seeing your gem immediately, but I promise all reviewed entries will be published within 12 hours.

Problems, anyone?

Cheetah

12-05-2007, 16:20

Vladimir

12-05-2007, 20:37

I hate to say it, but that stopped being a debate years ago ~;)

Years as in two or three? Look at what it was 30 years ago. No, seriously, it could be referenced.

KukriKhan

12-06-2007, 04:18

Do we have a deadline or schedule for this debate? I am asking because I will be away from Thursday till Saturday afternoon, so the earliest time I can send my opening statement is Saturday evening.

Also, I have no objections to Odin's idea, in fact I am too very much interested in what other people think about the debate.

No rush Honorable Cheetah-san. We have the December debate almost Gahzette-ready now, so we have the whole month for a Sigurd vs Cheetah duel (tm).

woad&fangs

12-08-2007, 17:56

congratulations to Crazed Rabbit on his victory. I agree with the part about him controlling the debate. I was on the defensive far too often considering that I had to go on the attack in order to prove my point.

the article mentioned a points system. I was wondering if I could see the points totals for me and CR. I am curious about how close it was.

Crazed Rabbit

12-08-2007, 20:01

:bow:

Thanks to my honorable opponent and the judges.

And a huzzah for gun rights everywhere!

Crazed Rabbit

seireikhaan

12-09-2007, 15:18

Well, it was an interesting read. In summary, I also think that CR won the round, strictly from a debate perspective. However, I would warn both debaters against the idea that syllogisms are always correct, as they can hide fallacies.

For example:

God is love.

Love is blind.

Ray Charles is blind. Therefore,

Ray Charles is God.

Decker

12-11-2007, 02:05

:bow:

Thanks to my honorable opponent and the judges.

And a huzzah for gun rights everywhere!

Crazed Rabbit
So does that mean turkeys and deer can shoot back?

on a serious note, congrats, and good debate.

Caius

12-11-2007, 03:51

Due to my opponent said he's leaving the org, I'm not longer able to participate. Therefore, I'm teh winner! :beam:

Sigurd

12-11-2007, 08:33

Due to my opponent said he's leaving the org, I'm not longer able to participate. Therefore, I'm teh winner! :beam:
Your MASTER DEBATER badge will be sent to you by mail. Congratulations!! :beam:

KukriKhan

01-02-2008, 14:50

Our previously scheduled debate-opponents have apparently been overcome by real-life events, and are no longer available to participate.

Sigurd Fafnesbane tells me he is eager to engage in a "Does God Exist?" debate. He says he can argue either side, but notes that he has already prepared material for the "yes, God Exists" side.

Would anyone like to debate on the "No, God Does Not Exist" side?

If so, please either respond here, or PM me.

Cheetah

01-02-2008, 17:57

I am really sorry for the delay. I will do it today. :bow:

Cheetah

01-02-2008, 21:14

I am writing it is half-way ready ... :sweatdrop:

Cheetah

01-05-2008, 10:33

It was a long day. ~;) I apologise for the delay from everyone but especially from Sigurd, who is no doubt eager to try to do the impossible. ~;)

I have sent my opening statement to Kukri.

Sigurd

01-05-2008, 11:35

It was a long day. ~;) I apologise for the delay from everyone but especially from Sigurd, who is no doubt eager to try to do the impossible. ~;)

I have sent my opening statement to Kukri.

I await on the battlefield good Ser.
Let God decide the victor!!

Sigurd

sapi

01-05-2008, 11:45

Let God decide the victor!!Hey, that's cheating :laugh4:

Caius

01-05-2008, 23:07

Your MASTER DEBATER badge will be sent to you by mail. Congratulations!! :beam:
I'm still waiting for the badge :whip:

CountArach

01-05-2008, 23:45

I await on the battlefield good Ser.
Let God decide the victor!!

Sigurd
Haha, touche.

I'll be watching this debate with interest.

seireikhaan

01-06-2008, 04:02

Hmm, just for future reference, I would like to do a debate regarding whether intelligent design should be taught as part of public school science curriculum, taking the side of negation. Would anyone, after the current debate is over and judged, be willing to go against me?

Viking

01-09-2008, 19:26

Where's the next reply in the on going debate?

KukriKhan

01-26-2008, 15:00

Where's the next reply in the on going debate?

We await Cheetah's rebuttal.

Viking

01-26-2008, 21:02

We await Cheetah's rebuttal.

I see; it took quite some time before the first rebuttal by Sigurd was posted. :beam:

Sigurd

01-28-2008, 10:22

I see; it took quite some time before the first rebuttal by Sigurd was posted. :beam:
It was not my turn...
Cheetah should have gone first. I was getting a little impatient and twisted Kukri's arm to let me go first.:whip:

The original plan was to post Cheetah's rebuttal of my proposition first, then my rebuttal on Cheetah's proposition and his rebuttal second.

Will he yield I wonder?
His castle is besieged by a horde of Northmen who just got tired of the attrition technique. We made our first attack...

Is that a white flag on his keep?

KukriKhan

02-07-2008, 06:20

With this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1825814&postcount=5), we bring an end to that debate, with Sigurd Fafnesbane declared the winner.

This releases Sigurd from his self-imposed restriction from running the debates (since he was a participant). I yield control back to him.

There has been some discussion in other threads about a "Socialized Medicine" debate. Fine idea, I think. Are there others?

Sigurd

02-07-2008, 11:20

Zim

02-07-2008, 11:48

I'd give it a try, but I think it would be rather difficult. Aside from having gone to one of those evil public universities (according to the pastor of a church I briefly attended, anyway) that twists young people's minds, I have no idea where to find good sources for making the argument that intelligent design deserves to be taught in schools. Most of what I've seen has been rather low in quality.

Hmm, just for future reference, I would like to do a debate regarding whether intelligent design should be taught as part of public school science curriculum, taking the side of negation. Would anyone, after the current debate is over and judged, be willing to go against me?