Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Proposing a debate but not taking part

deamonomic
Posts: 121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2011 5:51:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Is there a way to post a debate but not take part in it? I ask because there is a topic i would like to see debated by two other people, without me being in it. I don't want to be in it because i have dealt with it way to much in the past so I'm tired of taking part in it, but i would still like to see it go down from the perspective of spectator.
I would gladly lose a million times over then win by cheating once.
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2011 7:26:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Sadly no. However, that would be a cool feature!
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
deamonomic
Posts: 121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2011 8:22:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I thought there was a way to do that at one point (Like 2 years ago) but i may be miss remembering
I would gladly lose a million times over then win by cheating once.
deamonomic
Posts: 121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2011 9:06:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
the topic is about Call Of Duty (Video Game). More specifically the topic is About Whether or not Killing in an objective based game mode (such as capture the flag) is as important as playing the objective part. One person would be arguing that Killing in an objective based game type is pointless. and the other person would be arguing that Killing the other team is just as important as the objective side.
I would gladly lose a million times over then win by cheating once.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2011 1:59:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/23/2011 9:06:09 AM, deamonomic wrote:
the topic is about Call Of Duty (Video Game). More specifically the topic is About Whether or not Killing in an objective based game mode (such as capture the flag) is as important as playing the objective part. One person would be arguing that Killing in an objective based game type is pointless. and the other person would be arguing that Killing the other team is just as important as the objective side.

I'm interested in game debates but I don't understand this.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
deamonomic
Posts: 121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2011 1:25:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
okay some people argue that in an objective based game like Domination for example, killing is an Insignificant task compared to jumping on the flags and getting "capture/defend points". as they put it kill "whoring". The reason they think this way is because your team Literally can not win without you capturing at least one flag point. As such killing the other team is a secondary thing at best.

My argument is that Killing the opposing team is just as Vital as capturing the flag control points. There are a few reasons for this. For example, If we are playing Demolition and the opposing team has planted A bomb somehow. What I will do is instead of trying to Defuse the bomb/ stand next to the guy defusing it, I choose to push up and form an advanced shield if you will. Now to other people it would seem like I am simply going after kills, when in reality I am creating a buffer zone, which will allow you to do your job.

If you play a team that is decent to good, you will not win if you consider killing a minimal task at best. Killing the other team keeps them at bay, allowing your team to capture the objectives without being harassed by the other team.

So Person A, will be trying to argue that Killing is Non-essential, to winning a game and Person B, will be arguing that Killing the other team (in other words keeping them busy and disorganized) is just as important at the act of sitting there planting the bomb.
I would gladly lose a million times over then win by cheating once.
Cobo
Posts: 556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2011 7:42:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/23/2011 5:51:37 AM, deamonomic wrote:
Is there a way to post a debate but not take part in it? I ask because there is a topic i would like to see debated by two other people, without me being in it. I don't want to be in it because i have dealt with it way to much in the past so I'm tired of taking part in it, but i would still like to see it go down from the perspective of spectator.

This is actually a really good idea. I'd like to see this implemented.
Church of the BANHAMMER GODS priest