It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


So You Wanna Fight? ATS Debate Tournament (Tournament Update)

page: 20
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:44 AM

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I would like some feedback on my unilateral tradition of trying to incorporate puns into the titles. Is it even the least bit amusing or create any intrigue as to the content, or would you guys prefer if next round I just get right to the point?

The title-puns are good as long as the topic is then clearly defined in the OP.

Your topics are great, your puns could be ever so slightly more amusing

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 04:16 AM
Would it KILL you people to give me a political debate once and a while? I mean cmon!

Great topics btw!

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 04:21 AM
reply to post by whatukno

I have not posted in the alien section even once that I know of. I could of used something like the economy, religion, environmental, political or something I am interested in. Oh well.

That is the way it goes though.

edit on 27-10-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 04:25 AM
Good luck to all debaters. This should be fun!

Some great topics as well btw..
edit on 27-10-2010 by Rising Against because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 05:15 AM
Just to reassure you guys, names were never paired with topics. Matches and topics received random numbers which were then randomly paired, then the numbers were again decoded to reveal who had what topics.

Edit to add: If I'm not mistaken, schrodinger's cat would therefore say that for a few moments, you all had whatever topic you wanted... plus 7 others. Then I had to go and blow it by opening the box and looking at the result.
edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 05:45 AM
Here is an index of topics for round 1, to make it easier for readers who are looking for a debate they would like to follow.

MemoryShock vs Hotbakedtater: The world needs a single common language to achieve peace and stability.

orange-light vs ProtoplasmicTraveler: Astrological observations correlate to human events.

Whatukno vs Romantic_Rebel: Medical technology which makes human life expectancy potentially unlimited should not be developed.

OzWeatherman vs Getreadyalready: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam will eventually achieve a peaceful reconciliation.

Skyfloating vs Rising Against: On average, black and white movies are better than movies in color.

wormwood13 vs Airspoon: Eating the meat of animal species which are commonly kept as pets is unacceptable.

Budski vs ModernAcademia: The well being of one's family should be a greater priority than the well being of one's self.

Chissler vs saltheart foamfollower: First contact between aliens and humans is most likely to occur in the 21st century if it happens at all.
edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 06:18 AM
A debater has asked for further definition of a topic. I am giving the same answer in public to ensure fairness.

Additional information about the topic is generally not offered.

Traditionally, debaters have interpreted/defined propositions in the terms they find reasonable/advantageous, so long as they can find some support for that interpretation/definition in the topic as phrased.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 06:20 AM

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower

I have not posted in the alien section even once that I know of. I could of used something like the economy, religion, environmental, political or something I am interested in. Oh well.

Where Im from we like to say "Play the cards you are dealt".

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 06:23 AM
I must say, those are some DAMN good topics.

I was in a debate class. Had some great debates.

It truly is a constructive, productive human activity.

Kudos to whoever decided on those topics.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 07:35 AM
You have a "Bill of Rights" for Debators and you might also want a "Code of Conduct" for Debate Judges.

Judges should actually not be Judging by which person they like more/less or who they agree with, but on the merit of the Debate and the Debate only.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 07:37 AM
Thank you for the u2u, Vagabond.

I need to contact my opponent though. I'm flying to my nations capital this morning (Ottawa) for a national conference on Mental Health. I'm going to be out of town for the week and the only internet access I'll have is from my iPhone. Hardly a means to type up a post.

Hopefully my opponent can accommodate this. I've been looking forward to the tournament.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:06 PM
I'm handling the issues as fast as I can but I have to admit they are piling up on me. I got here not long ago and said, "wow this is going smooth, only 2 problems." I've only fixed one problem and several more have arisen.

Not complaining, just saying bear with me.

chissler and saltheart foamfollower both have the same u2u from me in their inbox pertaining to chissler's request.

It has come to my attention that a fighter was accidentally excluded because his past experience was not reflected in the Ranking Thread. In his case this happened because his past experience was way back in the good old days (when the forum was more formal and structured and intimidating even to an ego like mine)- so the moral of the story is that fighters should check their win-loss records and ranks from time to time, especially before tournaments, and let me know if I appear to have made a mistake to correct there.

Krazy Jethro will therefore be the first alternate introduced if anyone is unable to begin. My public apologies to him, as he is the victim of a flaw in a system I set up some time ago and never fully worked out.

This is a test of a link I am trying to fix. For some reason this one is not going so well. Please perform a special check on complicated urls like that to be sure they work before posting them.

ATTENTION: The Only Sure-Fire Way to Test a link like that is to actually post it- NOT preview post. You may test such links in this thread when you need them. The link below works properly in my "preview post" function but NOT in the thread display. It appears that this is somehow being caused by our board, and not by any mistake on the part of the debater who had the problem.

C'est da la foutaise
edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:21 PM
I am so sorry, vagabond, for certain I will do test posts here, I feel like a dunce now, but oh well, all I can do is move on and make my points on target and salient!! At least I can be an example for everyone else!!

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:30 PM
It appears that this was 99.9999999% certain NOT to have anything to do with your link. It appears you did everything right because I have actually seen it look and work with my own two eyes... unfortunately the only way I can show it to anyone else is to take a screen grab during preview post, which doesn't make the link any good.

It is my hope that this issue will not affect the debate in any significant way, and I am working to that end as we speak.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 02:55 PM
Alright. I've got a new system going- I'm trying to keep my Mood (under my avatar) updated to reflect my level of activity in managing the debates so you have an idea whats up if you u2u me while I'm sleeping or swamped with work on the tournament. Just a minor thing- may not help much but its there.

KrazyJethro is in (and by nothing other than incredible luck, he even ended up with the seed that he should have been assigned if he had been included from the outset)

Search-based urls seem to have a problem as disclosed above. They are used at your own risk from here on out. The problem that occurred already with those in one debate shall not have any bearing on the debate.

chissler has been confirmed to receive an extension until Sunday. He will surrender his 24 hour extension despite the first round grace period (his proposal- because he's the kind of sporting competitor that makes this forum great)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:12 PM
Disregard the post that previously appeared in place of this one. The solution still isn't working.
edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:22 PM
Last update for now.

To the best of my knowledge, all current issues have been resolved to the best of our ability.

If I have missed something, or if there are concerns about the correctness of any of the rapid decisions I've had to make, please inform me by u2u.

Taking a breather for a little bit. Will check in regularly.

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 03:53 PM
We now have a final answer on how to properly make long-links work. The exclusion of the http:// was part of the problem, and spaces are also needed to separate url tags from the labeling text in the middle.

Edit to add: You may view the code that was used to make the link work by selecting the "quote" reply option on this post.

translated - that is hogwash - link
edit on Wed 27 Oct 2010 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 27 2010 @ 05:50 PM
I have been informed that a participant is dropping out because his browser crashed in the middle of a post. I've been there. It's absolutely infuriating and it usually feels like you'll never quite recapture what you had going the first time out. I feel bad for the debater, but I understand.

As you guys may have noticed from how frantic I get in the midst of a tournament (running it or participating) I am all too familiar with how intense it can be having to hammer out one of the most air-tight posts you will ever make on ATS while under the gun and facing extra pressure to check and recheck things like character count and board code, etc (character limits are MAXIMUM, not minimum by the way- I think I got a question about that)...

It's important to remember first and foremost to have fun. I go out of my way to be myself when debating, even if it's a bit to my detriment. I'd rather lose a debate that makes me smile when I go back and re-read it than add a notch to my belt that I can't look at without bad memories.

It is advisable to
1. Put together a tool chest to take away some of the pressure. Tools to count characters, check spelling, save work etc will all make the technical parts go faster and let you focus more on having fun. Many word processor programs can give you most of the tools you need all in one place, but there are other options as well.

2. If you find yourself not enjoying the debate, put more emphasis on being your usual ATS self. As a matter of personal preference (but having nothing to do with the actual criteria of debate) I've always been willing to let my digital alter ego cost me points with the judges to make the debate more fun for myself to participate in.
I often go back and read my old debates, either as a whole, or just my own posts just to relive the fun of cooking up something that nobody else would have been likely to come up with. And when it comes down to a choice between a debate that I lost or was said not to have done very well in but which I had a lot of fun in, or a debate that I absolutely ran the table on but stressed a lot over, I go with the one I enjoyed.

posted on Oct, 28 2010 @ 03:12 AM
I'm fixing to call it a night again. 6 of our 8 debates are under way. One is already under an extension. Only one u2u was necessary to check on a member who hasn't posted yet, however I am still confident that they will arrive to post in a perfectly acceptable period of time.

See you all tomorrow. Great work so far, and I wish you all the best of luck.

top topics

<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in