Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Why?

lol101
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.
Lol
"Logic is true = sky = blue"
-Rapping vi_spex.
Lol101, stop crab finching my Foo fights! It is my tree! And stop being a SpongeBob sorter!

The Lying Asteroids Nullify A Dirt Asteroid Home Immediately
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.
"One must conform to the baseness of an age or become neurotic."

~ Musil

"The rather low bar for right wing at this point is saying 'I don't want my small, liberal, high-trust society be overwhelmed with economic migrants with stone age beliefs.'"

~ Skepsikyma
Romanii
Posts: 4,994
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 4:21:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

Troll it.
lol101
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 12:21:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

I mean three people debating each other. Once two people accept a debate, it's a three way debate. One can debate Pro, one can be Con, and the other is the middle ground.
Lol
"Logic is true = sky = blue"
-Rapping vi_spex.
Lol101, stop crab finching my Foo fights! It is my tree! And stop being a SpongeBob sorter!

The Lying Asteroids Nullify A Dirt Asteroid Home Immediately
bsh1
Posts: 27,945
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 4:19:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

It's theoretically possible, but very impractical. For example, you could have a three way debate on the following: The USFG should substantially increase it's trade relations with just one of the following: Venezuela, Argentina, and Cuba. Each debater takes a country, and argues that their country should be the one with whom the USFG should increase trade.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...

A Debate Challenge: http://www.debate.org...
lol101
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 9:53:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:19:27 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

It's theoretically possible, but very impractical. For example, you could have a three way debate on the following: The USFG should substantially increase it's trade relations with just one of the following: Venezuela, Argentina, and Cuba. Each debater takes a country, and argues that their country should be the one with whom the USFG should increase trade.

It would just be for fun. And whoever wins a 3 way debate gets an extra ELO boost. It would also be interesting to see the different positions, Pro, Con, and the Mid. (Middle Ground) The reason it seems impractical is because it's too black and white, but it would be very interesting in some cases.
Lol
"Logic is true = sky = blue"
-Rapping vi_spex.
Lol101, stop crab finching my Foo fights! It is my tree! And stop being a SpongeBob sorter!

The Lying Asteroids Nullify A Dirt Asteroid Home Immediately
lol101
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 9:55:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:19:27 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

It's theoretically possible, but very impractical. For example, you could have a three way debate on the following: The USFG should substantially increase it's trade relations with just one of the following: Venezuela, Argentina, and Cuba. Each debater takes a country, and argues that their country should be the one with whom the USFG should increase trade.

Example:
Pro-Marijuana should be legal
Con-Marijuana should not be legal
Mid-Marijuana should only be legal for medical purposes
Lol
"Logic is true = sky = blue"
-Rapping vi_spex.
Lol101, stop crab finching my Foo fights! It is my tree! And stop being a SpongeBob sorter!

The Lying Asteroids Nullify A Dirt Asteroid Home Immediately
Wylted
Posts: 21,683
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 10:00:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

Abortion is ethical, abortion is unethical and abortion doesn't exist so the argument is stupid. 3 opinions, one topic
lol101
Posts: 96
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2015 10:08:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 10:00:11 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.


Abortion is ethical, abortion is unethical and abortion doesn't exist so the argument is stupid. 3 opinions, one topic

It doesn't apply to everything. It is optional.
Lol
"Logic is true = sky = blue"
-Rapping vi_spex.
Lol101, stop crab finching my Foo fights! It is my tree! And stop being a SpongeBob sorter!

The Lying Asteroids Nullify A Dirt Asteroid Home Immediately
ShabShoral
Posts: 3,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 12:39:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 9/23/2015 9:55:41 PM, lol101 wrote:
At 9/23/2015 4:19:27 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/23/2015 4:15:48 AM, ShabShoral wrote:
At 9/23/2015 3:53:43 AM, lol101 wrote:
Why aren't there any 3-way debates yet? That would be pretty cool. Of course it should be optional, but otherwise, a good option.

How would that actually work? You can only affirm or deny a resolution - there's no third option.

It's theoretically possible, but very impractical. For example, you could have a three way debate on the following: The USFG should substantially increase it's trade relations with just one of the following: Venezuela, Argentina, and Cuba. Each debater takes a country, and argues that their country should be the one with whom the USFG should increase trade.

Example:
Pro-Marijuana should be legal
Con-Marijuana should not be legal
Mid-Marijuana should only be legal for medical purposes

If the resolution is "Marijuana should be universally legal", there's no functional distinction between the last two positions.
"One must conform to the baseness of an age or become neurotic."

~ Musil

"The rather low bar for right wing at this point is saying 'I don't want my small, liberal, high-trust society be overwhelmed with economic migrants with stone age beliefs.'"

~ Skepsikyma