Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Another way to fix "debates"

Dnick94
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2008 9:27:25 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
"It is obvious that many debaters don't wish to be the instigator in debates. This is simply because the instigator has the harder job when it comes to winning the debate given that the debate always ends with the contender rebutting all of the instigator's arguments. Thus, I have somewhat of a solution that can help deter this problem."
- Logical-Master

I suggest that debate should have unlimited rounds so that the debate would end only if one person concedes. Therefore, the instigator doesn't have to complain that he lost the debate if he had conceded. Even with 5 rounds, the contender can rebutte all of the instigator's arguments leading to the easy win of the debate. Logically, anyone can lose a debate if their opponent convinces them that they are wrong. Then both of them can agree to a statement which they both agree on such as " Resolved: In a fight without prior preparation, Batman would not certainly defeat Spider-Man.
"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."
-Albert Einstein
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2008 9:58:42 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
Whereas that idea sounds good in theory, there is only one problem: People like me: http://redwing.hutman.net...

I'd keep the debate going for eternity if such a system were implemented.

In addition, the longer the debate goes on, the less likely voters are to read. So the voting system would simply be more screwed up than it currently it is. Thus, like communism, your idea only works ideally.
Robert_Santurri
Posts: 106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2008 11:41:09 AM
Posted: 8 years ago
At 10/18/2008 9:58:42 AM, Logical-Master wrote:
Whereas that idea sounds good in theory, there is only one problem: People like me: http://redwing.hutman.net...

I'd keep the debate going for eternity if such a system were implemented.

In addition, the longer the debate goes on, the less likely voters are to read. So the voting system would simply be more screwed up than it currently it is. Thus, like communism, your idea only works ideally.

Agreed, it's funny that our debate was brought up LM. I'm pretty sure we would still be debating that today if it were unlimited rounds. Haha
"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home."
-- Edward R. Murrow

"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
-- Robert Frost
Dnick94
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2008 7:45:34 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
Do you reckon that you can debate for eternity without conceding to your opponent? How is that possible? Won't one of you give up after being convinced of the other person?
"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them."
-Albert Einstein
scissorhands7
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2008 7:54:04 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
If you know LM, you'd understand.
I rock peas on my head, but don't call me a peahead, bees on my head but dont call me a beehead, bruce lees on my head but dont call me a lee head...
I hang out with an apple who loves self loathing....
Its my show I'm andy milonakis.
scissorhands7
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2008 7:54:17 PM
Posted: 8 years ago
knew not know
I rock peas on my head, but don't call me a peahead, bees on my head but dont call me a beehead, bruce lees on my head but dont call me a lee head...
I hang out with an apple who loves self loathing....
Its my show I'm andy milonakis.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2013 1:55:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
One-on-one threads are wonderful. Two people (or possibly more) have a discussion on a given topic, without rules as to whose turn it is or how long they have to post. Nobody else can post in that thread. There's a linked Peanut Gallery thread for other people's comments. This leads to great productive discussions.

They just can't be "debates" for voting on.
sadolite
Posts: 8,842
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/14/2013 10:03:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/21/2008 7:45:34 PM, Dnick94 wrote:
Do you reckon that you can debate for eternity without conceding to your opponent? How is that possible? Won't one of you give up after being convinced of the other person?

Sheer boardom would make me concede. (Eternity?)
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%