Printable View
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 would like to participate, but preferbly about Global Warming. Is fake
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?
This should be good :yes:
Topics: anything but global warming, really...
maybe add "smoking ban: yes or no?" to the list, too ~;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
I am Pro Gun, I think Guns should be allowed in Society. :beam:
To clarify; yes, I'd be pro-gun rights/anti-gun control.
CR
Really? I had no idea. :wink:
I know, it's a bit of a surprise, but I'd thought I'd mix it up a bit.
:beam:
CR
You...you are? ~:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
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!*
That is awesome.Quote:
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.
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,Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane
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:
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!!'.
Wait...Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I've only got 1 wit. Can I borrow someone's?
I'll give you mine if you make me a moderator.:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
I'll give you RoadKill's if you make me a Moderator.
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.
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.
In a few weeks I might be willing to discuss Israel's policies thus far in the occupied territories.
Any one interested?
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:Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I'd like to see Pannonian on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar
I would also like to debate the war in Afganistan, my point of view: Get the hell out.
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
Tribes... are you okay? I've never seen you type that poorly.
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...
Now, the Pro group definesQuote:
This house believes that all that glitters isn't gold
House - U.S. Government
all that glitters - Taxes
gold - shouldn't be raise
so it would read
Then the Pro definesQuote:
The United States Government believes that taxes shouldn't be raised
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?
He's drunk again.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
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...was drunk again , a bit of soakage turns drunk into not quite sober .Quote:
He's drunk again.
I assumed so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
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: ).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.
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.
Do we have a confirmation on the three proposed debates?
But I like Kukrikhan. :embarassed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane
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 won't debate tribesman.
I don't find the idea of getting involved in some farcical debate on semantics appealing.
Crazed Rabbit