It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Second Debate Tournament for 2005!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
After a rather lackluster finish from the first tournament, the second one is about to get started. And you know what that means! You. Nygdan and I want YOU to debate your fellow members as an ATS Fighter.

The tournament will consist of 16 members in three elimination rounds. Each debate will consist of an introduction by both members, three longer cross-examinations, and a closing statement from each. Your responses are timed. Please take a look around the Debate Forum for a better idea of how they are structured. The reigning champion, BlackJackal as already withdrawan his customary free ride into the tournament, so this means that not only will we need the full 16 entrants, but that the belt is up for grabs! Can you take it?

If you want to enter, please u2u either Amorymeltzer or Nygdan with "Debate Entry" in the subject. You can also reply here. Old debators are encouraged to reenter.

If you have any ideas for topics for the debates, feel free to post them in this thread. If you don't have time to debate, but would like to be a judge, u2u us and we'll consider it. In summary,

1. Potential entrants u2u Me or Nygdan or post here.
2. Potential judges (cannot be entrants) MUST u2u either of us to ensure anonymity.
3. Any ideas for topics are welcome here or in the thread.

As if all that isn't enough, prizes will be offered.


Good luck to everyone and let's get this debate going!




posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Debate Entry


I would like to take place in a debate. I really don't know what else to write lol All I can say is that I can't wait



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Sent my u2u for entry as a contestant......



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I've sent my entry. Lucky for my adversaries, I'm fighting with half my schedule tied behind my back, so you'll be squaring off against an impromptu vagabond
.

best of luck all.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Good luck "Fighters".

To the organizers: Beware of debaticide bombers who enter "in good faith" but who detonate themselves midway through the first round. Use psychological screening and a dummy endurance test to avoid degrading the fine achievement of the winners.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   
It's great that the debates are kicking off again.

I do however have one concern that makes me reluctant to enter, and that is the selected topics often seem to be focused on United States issues, or on issues that will unfairly disadvantage members who are not American.

Here are a few past examples:

Gun control Laws in the US are not strict enough.

Canada should remain a seperate state from U.S.A.

The US is winning the War on Terror.

Affirmative action programs have worked.


In the first three examples, it need not be stated that ATS members who live in the U.S. (and Canada in the 2nd example) will possess a huge advantage when debating these topics, simply due to their intrinsic knowledge of the internal affairs of the countries involved. The fourth example is still obviously focused on the U.S. because we do not call equal opportunity "Affirmative Action Programs" outside the U.S., and as could be seen from the posts of the members involved, the focus was indeed centered on United States internal issues.

In an international setting, debate topics should be more generalized in their scope. "Gun control Laws in the US are not strict enough" would be fairer as a topic if it were changed to "Gun control works as a method of reducing violent crime." "The U.S. is winning the War on Terror" would be better as "The War on Terror is a beneficial policy for ensuring the peaceful future of the world". I hope you get my meaning.

I'm sure my statements here will be misconstrued and I will receive some angry replies, so be it, but just imagine for a moment if the majority of the posters/debaters on this board were Ugandan, and the debate topics were things like "Ugandan society has been adversely affected by the fiscal policies of President Museveni". Obviously this would not be fair to the non-Ugandan entrants.

I urge Amorymeltzer and Nygdan, who I believe are both American themselves, to remember that this is an international board with members from all over the globe, and to consider this factor when choosing appropriate topics for debate - topics that will provide a level playing field for all participants. If you must choose topics related so specifically to the U.S., then perhaps ensure that those debating such topics are themselves both American.

[edit on 2005/6/22 by wecomeinpeace]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   
You had mentioned a time limit. Is this in hours, days, minutes, or what? If it's in the day realm, I'd be game for entering, but with work and life, I can't be sure I'd be able to do it if it were hours. If that's the case, though, I'd love to be a judge.

U2U suspended, pending response (Frickin' writing software reports for the FDA all day, I start talking like that!
)



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Thanks for the input wcip.
It has been well noted. Our current group of topics should stand pretty well in your eyes, but we will review them.

Feel free to offer any ideas you may have.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   
18 hours, JJ. That'd be 3/4 of a day.


It's enough to accomodate all timezones with plenty of time to read, react, research, respond, edit, and keeps the debate moving at a nice clip. It's been my experience in past debates that I'm often posting plenty early.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
18 hours, JJ. That'd be 3/4 of a day.


It's enough to accomodate all timezones with plenty of time to read, react, research, respond, edit, and keeps the debate moving at a nice clip. It's been my experience in past debates that I'm often posting plenty early.


The danger of 18 hours is that it rotates the time. If a member is only able to sign on at one specific time of day, the window of response may "walk" out of his online time frame. A 24 hour period ensures that the member's ability to sign on will coincide with his time-limit to reply.

If we don't go with 24 hours, I for one will have to withdraw for fear of failing to make timely responses.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   
I have also sent off my u2u to become an entrant.
Couple of ideas:
Possibilities of ET's in our history.
Which is better Aethism or Religious faith why can't they both exist?
Creationism vs Evolution Should both be addressed in some way in our school systems?
I know the last two have a religous base to them but due to the number of heated arguments the last few months on these subjects, they may provide good debate material.

[edit on 22-6-2005 by kenshiro2012]

[edit on 22-6-2005 by kenshiro2012]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I don't have any debating experience, but here's a couple of topics I came up with.

"A one world government would be a positive advancement for mankind."

"War is an integral part of human nature and always will be."

"True power lies in the hands of corporations, not in the hands of elected representatives."



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:15 PM
link   
wooohoooo!

Fantastic work Amory and Nygdan!



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I'd like to reassert my opinion that a 24 hour time limit would be more practical for those of us who have limited access to the internet. It may very well save this competition from imploding the way the last one did.

I'm anxious to hear what Nygdan and Amorymeltzer think.


Also, as far as topic suggestions, perhaps we could stray from the traditional political issues and mix it up with more specific issues, historical, speculative, theological, etc?
Just a few examples:

Was President Harding Murdered?

Could Iraq have formed the nucleus of an Islamic Superpower if they had defeated Iran swiftly in 1980?

Could Satan's rebellion be justified?

Did Atlantis exist?

Etc.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
i would like to take place in this one...

i u2u'ed MacKiller a LONG time ago about this one...

he said he would save my u2u...

so, will this be a factor for me???

thanks...





posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I'd like to second the preference for a 24 hour time limit......

An 18 hour time limit would keep the pace up, but a difference of 6 hours will be felt by contestants who are obligated to a daily schedule.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Well, tsA, Mac is currently *away* so...

The 24 hour limit could be possible if necessary. Nygdan and I shall confer over it. Keeping the debates going forward is very important, but we would like to accomodate everyone. (or as close as possible)

Well noted.



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
Well, tsA, Mac is currently *away* so...


so what???

sorry...

i just want to join in this debate...


EDIT:

don't look at this post





[edit on 22-6-2005 by they see ALL]



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 09:15 PM
link   
I would like to take place, if that is possible?

Thanks,
Jack



posted on Jun, 22 2005 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I would like to sign up for this debate.
I may be rather new, but you all know me.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join