colin leslie deans erotic poetry is put down on DDO where similar works would not
Debate Rounds (3)
you can download for free deans poetry from here to see what his poetry is about
it has been said of deans work
"This is the single worst, most vulgar, and perverted sense of Literature I have read."
my claims is
1) the naughty bits in Lady Chatterley's Lover a novel by D. H. Lawrence, would not be put down
2) discussing fifty shades of grey would not be put down
3) discussing the naughty bits in Shakespear would not be put down
4)discussing the naughty bits ie incest masturbation in the bible would not be put down
if con says no the above debates would would not be put down then I argue colin leslie deans poetry is put down DDO
The National Library of Australia regards dean poetry to have cultural value since they have archive/preserved colin leslie dean work
Before we have this debate, there is something that I think needs to be addressed. You are Colin Leslie Dean, right? You talk about him/her in the third person, but either you are the BIGGEST fangirl/boy for a relatively unknown poet, you are CLD, or you hired someone that is pretty good at public relations. I mean, I've never heard of this person before seeing your debates, so I guess the advertisement is working. You even give a link to free poetry of CLD. You aren't even trying to be subtle.
Your link is to 1 of 60 debates you have had about this person's poetry, and thus is only the opinion of one. I'm sure you can probably link to where your, um, "debates" have been met with reproach, but you have allowed 8,000 characters for each round. Surely you could have found a few more, no?
Really, it depends on the debate subject. Even narrowing it down to the oh-so-maturely put "naughty bits" of, say, Fifty Shades of Gray, there is still a variety of topics to be had there. For instance, does FSoG promote BDSM or rape culture? One could even have a debate about how a series of glorified fanfiction could be made into a book trilogy, if it happened an appropriate amount of times. One could gain from having a philosophical debate about what sex means in a medium full of metaphor, figurative language, and where one can choose to take a sentence literally or figuratively. I would even argue that a debate about one's opinion, which is truly what you are offering here, not philosophy, not metaphor, pure opinion, and one could even back up their own opinion. However, hashing out the same exact debate in a different dress does not bode well with a public where debates are the common pastime.
Your next sentence is pure gibberish, so I can't respond.
Oh, and thanks for yet another advertisement for Colin Leslie Dean.
Okay, my rebuttals are out of the way. Now it is time to make some points.
Case One: I have alluded to this idea in this very argument before. You see, if my theory that you are either CLD or a vocal advertisement, it makes sense you advertise on the debate section of a debating website, but these topics aren't debates. A forum would be okay, maybe even the opinion section, but there is no rational discourse that can happen with you or the, um, "debates" you have chosen. So, I would say it is not Colin Leslie Dean's work that is being shot down, but it is your arrogant, self-advertisement or obsessive fangirling/boying over a pseudo-celebrity that is being shot down.
Case Two: You're CLD, right? Like, there's no argument at this point, assuredly. You even have debates about this self proclaimed "Australia's leading erotic poet's" idea on mathematical theories. Come on. We're not dumb.
Thanks, and I await your response.
"You are Colin Leslie Dean, right?"
it is no point to the debate whether I am or not that question is irrelevant
" I mean, I've never heard of this person before seeing your debates"
that is is irrelevant to the debate
to my example of put down
"Surely you could have found a few more, no?"
just do a search you will find more
my example I think captures the rest
con has to show that
colin leslie deans erotic poetry is NOT put down on DDO or show where similar works have been put down
so far con has given no proof of his position
I have given an example of my position
Actually, whether or not you are CLD is relevant to this debate, since I argued, and you didn't even try to respond to, that your debates are put down, not the work. The next point is also relevant, since I also argue it is your advertisement and obsession with your own work that is being put down.
I won't do your work for you. It is not my job to find other examples.
Actually, the burden of proof is on you to show that your work has been put down where similar works haven't. You haven't shown where a debate on FSoG has been accepted. I also argue that it is the sheer volume of your debates on the same artist that is not being accepted. In fact, your very first debate on this website, you had a serious conversation about whether or not "this is a great modernist poem".
You have given one example out of 60, and you have not shown where a discussion on similar works have been accepted.
Please, for the sake of the voters, try harder next time.
"It is not my job to find other examples.
thus cons position is mere assertion with no proof
thus I must wine the debate as I have at least given proof of my position
You had like 12 hours or more and you come up with "well you didn't DISPROVE me in a debate where I have sole burden of proof so I WIN." Um, okay. Okay then.
However, you DID NOT meet your burden of proof. My statement that it is not my job to find other examples was in response to you telling me to find more examples to support your position. Thanks for taking me out of context and being deliberately misleading. I'm not sure, but I think that constitutes me getting the conduct point at least.
You also did not show where any of the given works of art have been accepted on DDO. I know you aren't really the debater, being the "leading erotic, uh, poet, in Australia" or the public relations representative for the "leading erotic, uh, POET, in Australia" but there is this thing called the BURDEN OF PROOF. You don't just get to hand it over to me for a cheap win.
I did give exactly one debate you have had about your poetry where a serious conversation ensued. You gave one, and I gave one that shows that you are wrong. I also proposed that it is your offensively unsubtle advertisement tactics that have been shot down, but I see no comment on that one. Deny, deny, deny, am I right? Or, no, it's "Say nothing and maybe they'll forget."
So, to summarize, you didn't meet your burden of proof, you didn't respond to my objections to your own example, you didn't respond to my alternate theory about why your debates are met with reproach, and you've been purposefully misleading to try to save your case.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't really argue other than the first round and therefore didn't fulfill their burden. Awful s&g on the pro side. As pro essentially refused to debate, I give con conduct as well.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.