posted on Mar, 8 2008 @ 10:36 AM
I indeed think we should limit topics....seriously.
Only topics that MemoryShock can win.
There are the parameters and I look forward to full implementation...
Okay, for real seriously, the topics need to be random and there shouldn't be any parameters, save for what the Bill of Rights has allotted for
personal reasons, which is enough if a fighter chooses to abuse the system.
I think that the distinction fighter
carries with it a standard that precludes any abuse of the rules as well as a recognition that the topics
are assigned in good faith.
If you don't like a topic, then you have just been given an opportunity...an opportunity to discover exactly what and why you don't agree with the
topic position. It is either a way to reinforce your ideology or broaden your horizons.
We are here to argue in a standard that ATS has at times looked up to us for.
Let's not blow it by trying to restrict our intellectual boundaries...but if we do, then refer to my original 'serious' suggestion.
Originally posted by semperfortis
3. Seatbelts are a matter of personal choice and no laws should be in place regulating them.
I'll take pro. Fearless.
[edit on 8-3-2008 by MemoryShock]