Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Reinvigorating the Debate forum

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
I'm also up for a blind debate. Anytime.


Can beez and I debate Starwars vs Star Trek, though? we were pretty stoked on that and it never got set up...

It's kind of a gaff, but it should be pretty fun! Especially considering how badly Yoda would wreck any of the Trekkies...



This would make me very happy. The thing shouldn't always be serious. Yoda would destroy ALL of the Trekkies. Set phasers to what? Impossible? Star Wars!




posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Dude, that little green guy does backflipping ninja spin kicks, with a light saber! Oh, yeah. He's also 900 years old. That's 36 inches of 900 year old badass. Yoda would wreck em all.... It would be GLORIOUS!
edit on 18-8-2012 by W3RLIED2 because: Sp suxors
edit on 18-8-2012 by W3RLIED2 because: Autocorrect turned YODA into YOGA



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Just u2u GAO for "fighter" status. Once you have it, you can post in the debate forum, and we can start our debate. You pick the topic, or pick three, and let me pick one of three.

Seriously, you only have to get your feet wet, and you'll be a natural. I think your cynicism is a valuable asset for the debates, but honestly, the debates change the way you think.

You argue a point, not necessarily what you believe, but you find information, and think about what you believe.

Okay, I'm monologuing. Also, recruiting. Shame on me.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
I'm also up for a blind debate. Anytime.


Can beez and I debate Starwars vs Star Trek, though? we were pretty stoked on that and it never got set up...

It's kind of a gaff, but it should be pretty fun! Especially considering how badly Yoda would wreck any of the Trekkies...



This would make me very happy. The thing shouldn't always be serious. Yoda would destroy ALL of the Trekkies. Set phasers to what? Impossible? Star Wars!


Debates SHOULD be fun! I've enjoyed all the debates I've been a part of. Either as judge or participant, it's a great read and a good exercise for the grey matter.

*busy trying to "vulcan neck pintch" picture on computer screen*



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


I second Druid in saying that three posts for a debate is simply not enough space. While any longer debate can be time consuming, it is the amount of space that is needed in order to adequately state your case and argue against your opponent.

To shorten to only three posts means that the debates themselves will be severely lacking.
edit on 18-8-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:10 AM
link   
The minute I get Druid on board with an opponent, I've got an awesome topic to throw at people.


*giggity*



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


And psst, I'd love to do that Death Penalty one.....either side.

(Let things settle in!)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Since you folks think that 3 posts is too short, I'll take it staff and see what they think.

I cut my teeth on the 5 post debates and although challenging they were fun.

I've debated Canada vs. the USA, if seatbelts are bad or good, Steriods in sports and so on.

Go through the debate forum and have a look at some of the old debates, they were impressive. You really have to think about what you post.

Anyway, ya, I'll take it up with staff about upping the count to 4 posts.

Thanks for all the feedback guys and girls, that's what we are looking for.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


Four posts. Minimum. No, just minimum for a debate.

I am now curious to see how the three post debate works.

But, make it four and I'll quit speculating.

Final answer.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 06:08 AM
link   
Can I say this is an awesome development?


Errr... derp... I guess I just did.

*butting out*



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Can we tell them about the deathmatch rules yet?





posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Deathmatches?

(I don't think I could handle the excitement!
)



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


I second Druid in saying that three posts for a debate is simply not enough space. While any longer debate can be time consuming, it is the amount of space that is needed in order to adequately state your case and argue against your opponent.

To shorten to only three posts means that the debates themselves will be severely lacking.
edit on 18-8-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)


Just to add opinion a bit ...

I had trouble finishing one debate I was in not because I had to make too many posts but because of the topic primarily.

My first debate was on the Mayan calendar which was fine. I had to do some reading but it wasn't over the top. My next debate was on whether or not India should be allowed into the UN security council. Making this debate three posts wouldn't have made it any easier but actually harder. I had some RL issues then too but I *could've* done it if I didn't have to do so much research.

With the UN Security Council debate I had to familiarise myself with a huge amount of information very quickly and manage to post it in a short space, well structured, and at the same time explain terms. It made it impossible to actually sit down and find a few hours to do all of those things at once in a single sitting.

Helpful things would be:

#1 Being given study time perhaps for hard ones. Study time being sometime before the debate to read up on the topic if we're unfamiliar with it.
#2 Being told exactly the information judges are meant to be familiar with ... This might seem a small issue but in the realms of the Mayan calendar it involves some explaining and in the realms of the UN Security Council it was incredibly hard not knowing what the judges knew or didn't know.
#3 For blind debates it would be nice perhaps to have choices of topic and being able to eliminate one each in the interests of knowing when a particular debate is going to end hideously.

Just ideas.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Do i dare? I dare


Now to find something to debate on.. i'd like to take on something..



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by cenpuppie
 


You'll need to send a simple u2u to GAOTU789 and request "fighter" status, then come over and post. We'll have something ready for you, after a few posts of asking questions, or you can pick your topic. Mind you, you have to debate to keep the "fighter" status.



Good to see "members" wanting "fighter" status!


ETA: VISIT HERE.
edit on 8/21/12 by Druid42 because: added ETA



posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Please continue the discussion of and call for Debates in the official Debate Forum Thread.

To gain access to the Debate Forum, please apply for fighter status with a Supermoderator, saying "Hello, I would like to participate in the Debate Forum and request fighter status". ATSers who have been in good standing for at least 6 months or have 200 posts can acquire Fighter Status.

I am closing this thread so that Debate Proposals can only be made in the Debate Forum from here on.

Looking forward to seeing you all there.





new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join