The Debate Forum

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

So nevermind then... 

I thought i was being queued to post again.  

Maybe thats an indication to just go post it in mud pit?

Its ready to go again. Don't want to waste it now. If nothing comes of this, or my argument cant conform to the debate rules, I'll throw it in the pit for everyone. 

it doesnt seem to want to be a debate argument.

[putnam6]

https://web.archive.org/web/200309050750...p?tid=8815

 

Heckling is also common in some debates. This involves members of the forum offering some good humoured abuse to the competitors in the chit chat section of the site. However there is a fine line between heckling and barracking and members of the audience should remember to respect the speaker. Heckling can be scary at first but you will soon get used to it.

[SoTaxMe]

I was looking forward to reading a good debate.  We are now on page 13 of posts about how to handle the rules.  Too many chefs in the kitchen trying to cook up a rules recipe.  This will just not go well.
 

[cherokeetroy]

I'll end the debate right now.

Imagine a family.

The teenaged son has gotten into drugs, not doing his homework, not taking care of himself, not paying attention to the family.

The dad, takes away internet, grounds the young man, makes him exercise, and no tv or phone.

If you simply look at the dads' actions, it will appear extreme, dictatorial, authoritarian, fascist.

But only if you ignore what led up to it, what the teenaged son did to bring it to that point.

Biden's administration was the teenaged son.


Trump's the dad, trying to correct everything that the teen did.

If you side with the son, it would appear fascist, but if you're an adult, what Trump is soing is the right approach.

End debate.

I won.

Start the fucking parade.

I want glitter and confetti.

So we're supposed to look at Trump like he's our daddy?

We're little children and we are dependent on big daddy Trump and big daddy government to spank our naughty siblings

How is this not authoritarian

[Maxmars]

I was looking forward to reading a good debate.  We are now on page 13 of posts about how to handle the rules.  Too many chefs in the kitchen trying to cook up a rules recipe.  This will just not go well.
 

https://denyignorance.com/Thread-Deny-Ig...orum-Rules

[Truthhurts]

I checked out the debate, and it unfolded just as I predicted: opponent attempted to engage in a discussion with an idiot who merely repeats right-wing rhetoric.

[Maxmars]

I checked out the debate, and it unfolded just as I predicted: opponent attempted to engage in a discussion with an idiot who merely repeats right-wing rhetoric.

Your assessment is harsh. 

The whole thing took on a 'car-crash' feel from the start...

I must take ownership of that.

This debate spawned in the wild between opponents who routinely snipe at each others comments.
Their traditional point of contention revolves around "applied" ideology, and political observation... which means it usually gets partisan ... shedding most of it's value as 'information.'

Most people (I think) don't mind hearing another persons' idea... just not so much about how much they love it, and hate those who disagree.  

To have a dialogue we must speak... not "perform."

For me this debate speaks of that.

But that was not the point of the debate, nor can we ever escape that I will forevermore be most stringent with people who present the desire to debate their own topic again... There were a number of unfortunate flaws in the debate structure... still, good points were made well... which was expected of two members familiar with DI debate and it's form.  The unexpected part was... unexpected.

Both fighters theses will be considered by the judges, from which I abstain unless a tie-breaker is required.

Full disclosure: I do judge... and the other judges see it.  This ain't a game show.

[Ray1990]

That was a debate?

It was like watching the last 2 seasons of presidential debates which might as well have been blue cheerleader Vs red cheerleader.

In this case at least one was choreographed and looked professional, the other might as well have uploaded twerking videos. Sad really, but expected.

[ElitePlebeian]

"Posts in the debate forum should not exceed 800 words, if you can't make a singular point in fewer works, you should not be attempting an online interactive debate."

 Ideomotor failed from the start (1574 words). Structure wise it started good untill I realised I was reading a chapter of a book, not a post. You expect your opponent to pick apart a post that is a wall of text with a hundred different statements? And then youre surprised when DB doesnt go into each seperately, which couldve taken hours if done properly...?
Even if it shows a lot of genuine effort, in a debate that amounts to just throwing shit at the wall hoping something sticks.

The word limit is there for a reason, if you cant make your point within its probably not very strong to begin with.

[WallFlowerActive]

 You expect your opponent to pick apart a post that is a wall of text with a hundred different statements?

If you have to debate like a flat earther and keep changing and twisting the topic, you probably lost from the start.  When in a flat earther’s mind they are somehow winning?  Funny when people can’t be honest on simple reality.