Calling all "Fighters", a new debate series.

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


I'm up for a debate, too.

I'll take you on. Apparently topics are being randomized. So if we get set up I do nt know what could happen!




posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I don't think Picard or Kirk had the Force at their disposal.



Shhh. This is not a debate... We were 404'd!!!



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Ok, ok. Here's the format update:

Any member with "fighter" status can request a debate, with any parameters, as long as it is a serious ATS topic.



ALL topics MUST be approved by a staff member.




Fighters wishing to start debate threads, must:

1) Contact a debate moderator ( as listed here ) and ask if their debate idea flies or not.
2) If a debate mod agrees with the rough debate idea. the member must then submit their thread - before posting it - to the same staff member for review.
3) Once that is done then the person starting the debate must also U2U the same staff member when the debate is posted that that staff can review and verify everything.


*Item 1, italics, list of mods to U2U: We'll have a list of staff you can pm to get approval for the debate. Right now, and this again is flexible, some may come and go as their time permits, it is GAOTU789, Hefficide, Skyfloating, Semperfortis, xpert11, and tothetenthpower. Any of those will do.

(personal note: tenth and Heff are the best mods to contact, but you do have a choice. I like tenth because he's quick and thorough.)


W3LIED2 and vkey08 are open for a debate, and have agreed to debate. DWJ001 is waiting as well, but wishes to debate Pinke, and since he's an established member with newly granted fighter/debate status, we should respect his debate wishes..

enjoies05, waiting for a blind debate, so we need to match him up as well.

Then the comment:



Apparently topics are being randomized. So if we get set up I do nt know what could happen!


Topics are not randomized. If you REQUEST a blind debate, meaning you'll debate "any" topic, You WILL get a random topic. If you present a debate topic to one of the above listed mods, they will more than be willing to approve it, so DON'T YOU DARE get intimidated by steps 1 though 3. (There's a less intimidating revision needed there....)

Simply put:

If you wish to debate a topic, ask a mod or any other member to "host" it for you, and *after a bit of behind the scenes magic* you'll get a thread to debate in. You don't have to jump through hoops if you simply want a debate to run with, and you don't need to be a regular member in this forum. 6 month membership and 200 posts. Just ask GAOTU789 for "fighter" status, which gives you access to post here.

(Members who "host" follow rules 1-3, coordinating debates. All hosting rules apply.)

/ASIDE: There's more to debate than just arguing a point in a formal debate, there's the judging and the hosting aspects that also bring in different orders of critical thinking. Impartiality, responsibility, and honesty all are qualities that need to be reinforced. By letting members fill in the various roles, we are accomplishing a well-rounded experience in debate./

I'd suggest:
IF you don't have a debate topic, but would like to hone your debate skills, simply ask for a "blind" debate. Once two members are seeking a "blind debate", they'll be paired up in a *ahem* randomized topic. Topics will be decided by the debate "host", and the "host" will be responsible for all aspects of moderator interaction concerning the debate. The host for a debate thread volunteers their duty to see the debate to it's conclusion, and seeks mod approval on all aspects.

Just ask for a host for a blind debate with /username/. Someone will help you out. You'll get a debate thread, honest, free, and ready for you.


So much for simple........



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 



DWJ001 is waiting as well, but wishes to debate Pinke, and since he's an established member with newly granted fighter/debate status, we should respect his debate wishes..


Thank you, but I was only expressing my eagerness to be on the opposite side of Pinke for a change. I am open to all challengers, providing the topic is interesting. Everybody feel free to U2U me with a challenge and topic.



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Since Pinke hasn't opened the Moon Landing debate yet, and it seems that you REALLY would like to engage Pinke, I have PMed Host Tothetenthpower to see if a switch is possible. I would let you engage Pinke if she prefers and doesn't mind and I would find another opponent. No problems here. But since I don't know if it's too late and/or if it goes against regulations, I'll wait for a reply. Will then follow up.
edit on 24-8-2012 by SonoftheSun because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Or a typical man!



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


Can you please explain to me if I am judging that debate? I got very confused and now dont know if I am a judge or not!

First Mods said 'no', then you said 'yes', (PS I did like your decisiveness on that 'yes' though!) then mods said (?) then Beezer said he would sort it out and get back to me and never did...

so now I am asking you!
edit on 24-8-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Gee, did it really sound that way? The way I read it was AshleyD said anonymous only judging, but later said she was up to speed on the "new" rules. Anyhoo.....

Since beezzer is host, he'll be sending out the u2us to two people to apply their judging skills. A mod will always be available to decide the tie-breaker if required.

Short answer, you, as a member with fighter status, are in a "pool" of possible judges, so if you get a u2u at the end of the debate, yes.

Picking assigned judges eliminates that confusion, but that's just my preference.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


ok so I am not judging then....

thanks for telling me! I just wanted to know, since I offered to judge openly then was accepted (as we had been doing) then the mods came and changed it....

all the new rules and changing everything at the drop of a hat is just very confusing and odd to me... I rather dont like it. We are doing one thing on one day and the next day I come online its all changed.

I am trying to get ready so I can move in a few months, getting things straight on the home front of my personal life. I think, therefore, I will come back to the debate forum after a few months (once I have moved and life is normal once more), and decide whether or not I still want to be a part of it after reading all the changes you all have made by then, when it is not daily changing.

Good luck guys and have fun here!
edit on 25-8-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Perhaps you missed THIS THREAD? It was posted in BBQ, so if you don't have it as a favorite in MyATS, you may have missed it.




So in an effort to simplify things some, we have come up with a new set of guidelines( which are flexible and will evolve as the need arises).


Yes, we are trying different things. We now also have a nice compliment of Mods to contact, something which we were lacking, and they have done an outstanding job of clarifying the questions we've had. I'm glad for their support.

They new guidelines are not so bad, once a bit of adaptation is realized, but we are on our way to getting the kinks worked out.



posted on Aug, 25 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Judging.

Staff have are compiling a list of members who wish to Judge debates. We will contact those members in order to hand out requests to judge certain debates.

All judging will be done by this method for now. No member host may choose his Judges. All member created debates will be anonymous judging from this pool of judges.

We will be tweaking the design of this as stated earlier in the thread, so we may at one point have a more 'open judging process'.

Otherwise please stick to these guidelines



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 




Staff have are compiling a list of members who wish to Judge debates. We will contact those members in order to hand out requests to judge certain debates.


Good idea. Is the list of judging members to be posted? You know, like a one time, here you go, a list of judges? Perhaps posting a list of everyone who is in the judging "pool"? That way, everyone gets an idea of who could be a possible judge.



No member host may choose his Judges. All member created debates will be anonymous judging from this pool of judges.


Here I go with my suggestions again. The whole reason for having member hosted debates was due to a lack of a Mod to create debate thread. We are NOT lacking a Mod now, as we have several to contact in order to have a debate thread created.
That said, I feel it is safe to say that we could nix member hosted debates altogether, as Mod approval is required anyway, and simplify things even more.
Yes, it is fun to host, debate, and judge, but in an attempt to streamline things as much as possible, I'd recommend a revision to the rules that allows members to debate and judge, but throws the responsibility of hosting back to the Mods. I'm good with that. Mod hosting was the way it used to be anyway, and member hosting was a sort of "emergency" situation to keep the debate forum active.



We will be tweaking the design of this as stated earlier in the thread, so we may at one point have a more 'open judging process'.


The openness and flexibility of the staff is very much appreciated. While I myself am adverse to anonymous judging, I do understand that some individuals would harbor a grudge against a known member judge. To allow for the possibility of a more open system in the future is a good balance to strike. Kudos, Staff.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:50 AM
link   
Well, here is a situation I didn't expect.

What happens when a debate opponent gets the ban hammer?

Refer Here, then Here.



Obviously, there's no way to complete the debate, so does the debate get 404'd?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
Well, here is a situation I didn't expect.

What happens when a debate opponent gets the ban hammer?

Refer Here, then Here.



Obviously, there's no way to complete the debate, so does the debate get 404'd?


I've never seen that happen??? wow.. uh...... hmm......



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


PIck a new opponent and we'll roll with the punches - give them a day or three to prepare - and go ahead as planned.



~Heff



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I have just PMed Tothetenthpower. If Pinke and DJW001 decide to engage in the Moon Landing Debate, I wouldn't mind engaging Druid in the Death Penalty one. If Druid wouldn't mind and if all involved accept.

Sad news this morning about GRA.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
First post done!

If I'm against DJW I might be in trouble, but will see. If DJW does take it up I'd propose we maybe have at least one debate after where I'd switch to the position against my beliefs like DJW would be.

Just a suggestion for the moon debate, I might suggest that the video and picture rules be a little relaxed so long as we're only using them as reference materials and not as debating points. IE ... I have nothing against my opponent referencing pictures or video footage since it's part of what we're debating. I might have an issue if the person posted a video explaining their point though unless it was perhaps just illustrative. Example .. red circles and highlights would be okay. Voice over and spooky music not so much.

Annnnnnnnnnyway! Enjoy.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 





PIck a new opponent and we'll roll with the punches


Okay. Any one want the "con" position in the death penalty debate?
It'd be your turn if you accept.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by Hefficide
 





PIck a new opponent and we'll roll with the punches


Okay. Any one want the "con" position in the death penalty debate?
It'd be your turn if you accept.


I'd love to, but morally I can't LOL I'm actually testifying that someone should get it, so I'd be a hypocrite..



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


The idea of member hosted debates was to alleviate a possible bottle neck, as not every mod is going to have time to host each debate as members want to have them. You can choose to have a mod host if you'd like, none of us will decline, but we'll probably delay the beginning of it while others wrap up.

But members will be able to host debates at their own request.

As for Judging, the pool names will remain staff, as no members will be selecting judges. We will select judges at random from the pool and all judges will be asked to be discrete. This is to prevent the myriad of problems regarding debate judging considering bias etc..

~Tenth





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join