Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

To many RULES!!!

ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:24:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.

I would advise against using this forum as a platform for bashing on this guy, but yeah, he pretty much cancelled out all arguments that could be used against him.

I also did this debate, choosing the same tactic as reddington. Any argument that god doesn't love you was called out as being negative against god. The deist argument was the only one you could make.

BTW, can you vote on this? A troll just gave 7 points to the idiot were talking about.

http://www.debate.org...
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
XLAV
Posts: 13,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:32:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:24:25 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.

I would advise against using this forum as a platform for bashing on this guy, but yeah, he pretty much cancelled out all arguments that could be used against him.

I also did this debate, choosing the same tactic as reddington. Any argument that god doesn't love you was called out as being negative against god. The deist argument was the only one you could make.

BTW, can you vote on this? A troll just gave 7 points to the idiot were talking about.

http://www.debate.org...

Just report the vote.
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:33:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:24:25 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.

I would advise against using this forum as a platform for bashing on this guy, but yeah, he pretty much cancelled out all arguments that could be used against him.

I also did this debate, choosing the same tactic as reddington. Any argument that god doesn't love you was called out as being negative against god. The deist argument was the only one you could make.

BTW, can you vote on this? A troll just gave 7 points to the idiot were talking about.

http://www.debate.org...

lol I'm not using it as a platform to bash him. Though it's objectively true, as you said, that he tries to cancel out all arguments against his position and he preaches his brimstone cultish nonsense whenever he can.

Sure, I'll try.
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:33:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:32:34 PM, XLAV wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:24:25 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.

I would advise against using this forum as a platform for bashing on this guy, but yeah, he pretty much cancelled out all arguments that could be used against him.

I also did this debate, choosing the same tactic as reddington. Any argument that god doesn't love you was called out as being negative against god. The deist argument was the only one you could make.

BTW, can you vote on this? A troll just gave 7 points to the idiot were talking about.

http://www.debate.org...

Just report the vote.

I did. Its really annoying anyways though.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:36:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:33:09 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:24:25 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:21:46 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

I'm not opposed to rules, per se, but that guy's debate topic is a joke, so he could make me change my mind.

I would advise against using this forum as a platform for bashing on this guy, but yeah, he pretty much cancelled out all arguments that could be used against him.

I also did this debate, choosing the same tactic as reddington. Any argument that god doesn't love you was called out as being negative against god. The deist argument was the only one you could make.

BTW, can you vote on this? A troll just gave 7 points to the idiot were talking about.

http://www.debate.org...

lol I'm not using it as a platform to bash him. Though it's objectively true, as you said, that he tries to cancel out all arguments against his position and he preaches his brimstone cultish nonsense whenever he can.

Sure, I'll try.

I was playing devils advocate though. I am actually not super opposed to him making a rule that you can't debate against gods existence. This is understandable, because people would derail the real resolution.

The problem was how hyper regulated he made this rule....

YOU WILL RESPECT MY BLIND FAITH OR FORFEIT ALL POINTS!!!!!!!!!

I believe the resolution. I took the debate to work around his unbelievably slanted resolution. Calling god a deist is not insulting god.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:41:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.

Which is why ELO isn't the best way to determine who great debaters are all the time
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:42:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:41:04 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.

Which is why ELO isn't the best way to determine who great debaters are all the time

I think the win ratio is a better indicator.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
XLAV
Posts: 13,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:42:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.
I think he doesn't care about his ELO. All he wants is to preach his blind faith.
ChosenWolff
Posts: 3,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 9:44:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:42:43 PM, XLAV wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.
I think he doesn't care about his ELO. All he wants is to preach his blind faith.

I wouldn't jump the gun and say he has blind faith. Its the fact that he was unwilling to hear anything "non conservative" about his religion that made me lean that way.

Seriously though, I don't want to make this a bash on cultist forum. We're nearing harassment.
How about NO elections?

#onlyonedeb8
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/13/2014 11:42:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/13/2014 9:42:26 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:41:04 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:37:42 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:35:33 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 6/13/2014 9:20:31 PM, ChosenWolff wrote:
This should be penalized in some ways. I've been reviewing a lot of resolutions, and some of the top debaters seem to use lots of rules which slant the debate in their favor. I contend that all you really need to state in R1, is who has BOP, if first round is acceptance, do definitions need to be clarified?

It sickens me to see debates with lots of rules. Yes, they seem to be allowed, but should they? Take this debate for example. Is he allowed to do this? Yes. Should he?

http://www.debate.org...

In addition, I really don't like it when people stop debating for the sole purpose of calling you out for breaking the rules. Just continue to debate, and let the audience interpret the rules.

Just don't accept debates like that then. Leave people like them to be.

They become spam then. Plus, people will always take them and he'll use them to unfairly boost his ELO.

Which is why ELO isn't the best way to determine who great debaters are all the time

I think the win ratio is a better indicator.

No teven then all the time...
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.