Total Posts:56|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Abolishing The Presidency

Mikal
Posts: 11,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

___________________________________________________________________________________

I see both sides of the argument, and really am curious where the community stands. I think there are fundamental arguments for both sides.

Pro Abolishing

(a) Uselessness / ineffective
(b) Potential to cause harm
(c) No extra power than normal members / members can do the same thing normally

Con Abolishing

(a) Something that is useless does not necessitate getting rid of it
(b) Dichotomy between the position and those elected to it
(c) Motivates and holds person accountable to the community. Makes them live up to their word

I think the fundamental question is whether something that does nothing is worth getting rid of. The pro case should be able to link to harm in order to remove it, while con will say anything has the potential to cause harm.

To me the debate comes down to Pro showing if the election and office more often than not causes harm (drama, fights, etc). With the office being overall useless, there has to be a reason to overturn the status quo.

As I said just out of curioistiy, where do you as the community stand in this. Keep or get rid of it

___________________________________________________________________________________

Keep.

1.

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Rid of.

2.
KingofEverything
Posts: 590
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:11:52 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

___________________________________________________________________________________

I see both sides of the argument, and really am curious where the community stands. I think there are fundamental arguments for both sides.

Pro Abolishing

(a) Uselessness / ineffective
(b) Potential to cause harm
(c) No extra power than normal members / members can do the same thing normally


Con Abolishing

(a) Something that is useless does not necessitate getting rid of it
(b) Dichotomy between the position and those elected to it
(c) Motivates and holds person accountable to the community. Makes them live up to their word

I think the fundamental question is whether something that does nothing is worth getting rid of. The pro case should be able to link to harm in order to remove it, while con will say anything has the potential to cause harm.

To me the debate comes down to Pro showing if the election and office more often than not causes harm (drama, fights, etc). With the office being overall useless, there has to be a reason to overturn the status quo.

As I said just out of curioistiy, where do you as the community stand in this. Keep or get rid of it

___________________________________________________________________________________


Keep.

1. KingofEverything





_________________________________________________________________________


Get Rid of.

2.
You're sweet. Thank you :) <3 -ESocial

I am sorry Debate.org -KingofEverything

You guys can stop the circlejerk started around the election. It stopped being funny faster than Mirza's anti-American rants. -Jonbonbon

It's like when the kid who makes an ugly sand castle on the beach goes and tries to kick down someone else's sand castle because he couldn't make one as good as that. -YYW
Rosalie
Posts: 4,628
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:12:47 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
/in for it doesn't really matter either way.
" We need more videos of cat's playing the piano on the internet" - My art professor.

"Criticism is easier to take when you realize that the only people who aren't criticized are those who don't take risks." - Donald Trump
Mikal
Posts: 11,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:13:15 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

___________________________________________________________________________________

I see both sides of the argument, and really am curious where the community stands. I think there are fundamental arguments for both sides.

Pro Abolishing

(a) Uselessness / ineffective
(b) Potential to cause harm
(c) No extra power than normal members / members can do the same thing normally


Con Abolishing

(a) Something that is useless does not necessitate getting rid of it
(b) Dichotomy between the position and those elected to it
(c) Motivates and holds person accountable to the community. Makes them live up to their word

I think the fundamental question is whether something that does nothing is worth getting rid of. The pro case should be able to link to harm in order to remove it, while con will say anything has the potential to cause harm.

To me the debate comes down to Pro showing if the election and office more often than not causes harm (drama, fights, etc). With the office being overall useless, there has to be a reason to overturn the status quo.

As I said just out of curioistiy, where do you as the community stand in this. Keep or get rid of it

___________________________________________________________________________________


Keep.

1. Kingofeverything





_________________________________________________________________________


Get Rid of.

1. Joey
Fanny
Posts: 31
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:24:56 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
As an alternative, how about designate certain responsibilities to the president, like make DDO better or administrative responsibilities.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.
Emilrose
Posts: 2,479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 6:58:26 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

So you want both?
Commentator on a picture with David Cameron and a Cat: 'Amazing what you can achieve with photoshop these days. I'm sure that used to be a pig.'

Commentator on Hillary Clinton: 'If Clinton is now what passes for progressive, maybe this country deserves Trump.'

Commentator on British parliament: 'All that talent in one place, where is Ebola when you need it?'

John Kerry on words: 'These aren't just words, folks.'
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:11:08 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

lol
Subutai
Posts: 3,262
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:30:51 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
/in for abolition.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Mikal
Posts: 11,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:32:20 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

___________________________________________________________________________________

I see both sides of the argument, and really am curious where the community stands. I think there are fundamental arguments for both sides.

Pro Abolishing

(a) Uselessness / ineffective
(b) Potential to cause harm
(c) No extra power than normal members / members can do the same thing normally

Con Abolishing

(a) Something that is useless does not necessitate getting rid of it
(b) Dichotomy between the position and those elected to it
(c) Motivates and holds person accountable to the community. Makes them live up to their word

I think the fundamental question is whether something that does nothing is worth getting rid of. The pro case should be able to link to harm in order to remove it, while con will say anything has the potential to cause harm.

To me the debate comes down to Pro showing if the election and office more often than not causes harm (drama, fights, etc). With the office being overall useless, there has to be a reason to overturn the status quo.

As I said just out of curioistiy, where do you as the community stand in this. Keep or get rid of it

___________________________________________________________________________________

Keep.

1. kingofeverything

_________________________________________________________________________

Get Rid of.

1. joey
2. drafter
3. dylan
4. subtai
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:35:27 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 7:33:54 PM, XLAV wrote:
/keep

Because it creates drama and drama is always interesting to watch.

lol I'm pretty sure this is actually why the people in favor of it don't want it abolished.
XLAV
Posts: 13,729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:37:37 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 7:35:27 PM, dylancatlow wrote:

lol I'm pretty sure this is actually why the people in favor of it don't want it abolished.

Some of us, yeah.

The others actually think the presidency is still useful.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:43:24 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
I think it's useful and gives people a platform to interact with a person who can advise them for what they think is best, and it also gives a structure to the site, where it can people feel like they have a voice that can be heard, where if things are getting really out of hand they can approach the president who can in turn notify Airmax.

Something is better than nothing.

Keep it.
Mikal
Posts: 11,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:51:05 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Posted: 17 minutes ago
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

___________________________________________________________________________________

I see both sides of the argument, and really am curious where the community stands. I think there are fundamental arguments for both sides.

Pro Abolishing

(a) Uselessness / ineffective
(b) Potential to cause harm
(c) No extra power than normal members / members can do the same thing normally

Con Abolishing

(a) Something that is useless does not necessitate getting rid of it
(b) Dichotomy between the position and those elected to it
(c) Motivates and holds person accountable to the community. Makes them live up to their word

I think the fundamental question is whether something that does nothing is worth getting rid of. The pro case should be able to link to harm in order to remove it, while con will say anything has the potential to cause harm.

To me the debate comes down to Pro showing if the election and office more often than not causes harm (drama, fights, etc). With the office being overall useless, there has to be a reason to overturn the status quo.

As I said just out of curioistiy, where do you as the community stand in this. Keep or get rid of it

___________________________________________________________________________________

Keep.

1. kingofeverything
2. johnlubba
3. xlav
_________________________________________________________________________

Get Rid of.

1. joey
2. drafter
3. dylan
4. subtai
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 7:52:14 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 6:58:26 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

So you want both?

No. He said "or" not "and."

Duh.
Emilrose
Posts: 2,479
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 8:02:08 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 7:52:14 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:58:26 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

So you want both?

No. He said "or" not "and."

Ahem, the sentence that he used is:

'How many members are actually in favour of doing away with it or keeping it.'

You said 'me' to both.


Duh.
Commentator on a picture with David Cameron and a Cat: 'Amazing what you can achieve with photoshop these days. I'm sure that used to be a pig.'

Commentator on Hillary Clinton: 'If Clinton is now what passes for progressive, maybe this country deserves Trump.'

Commentator on British parliament: 'All that talent in one place, where is Ebola when you need it?'

John Kerry on words: 'These aren't just words, folks.'
spacetime
Posts: 449
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 8:10:29 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 8:05:16 PM, YYW wrote:
Having this conversation is stupid.

Dismissing legitimate views offhand is stupid.
Call me King Pootie Tang.
spacetime
Posts: 449
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 8:21:56 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
I would say keep it.

The presidency does seem to be a somewhat superfluous institution, but at the very least, it serves two worthwhile purposes: (1) it motivates the president himself to launch more community initiatives than they otherwise would, and (2) it grants them some amount of soft power (among newer members, anyways), which can potentially make presidential initiatives more likely to succeed than regular ones. The "drama" argument is bad because half of that comes from the abolition movement, lol.
Call me King Pootie Tang.
Mikal
Posts: 11,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 8:55:46 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 8:21:56 PM, spacetime wrote:
I would say keep it.

The presidency does seem to be a somewhat superfluous institution, but at the very least, it serves two worthwhile purposes: (1) it motivates the president himself to launch more community initiatives than they otherwise would, and (2) it grants them some amount of soft power (among newer members, anyways), which can potentially make presidential initiatives more likely to succeed than regular ones. The "drama" argument is bad because half of that comes from the abolition movement, lol.

It's not just from the abolition movement. The drama stems from competitive elections and voter manipulation. Trust me, I was the king of that. When you have two competitive members running, it branches into secs which makes the site go crazy

(1) I would argue anyone that wants the community to be better has the same initiative as the president. There may be a tiny deal of accountability more with the president, but I think anyone is under the same motivation to participate in the community and make it work. If we don't , it dies more and more eventually to the point no one would want to use the site.

(2) I disagree with soft power, there is no power at all. Just a figure head and someone that is considered to be , by the majority the person newbies see as the "overhead figure" of DDO. It's virtually useless to older members, but it acts in a way that helps new members because its structured.
TheGreatAndPowerful
Posts: 3,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 9:12:03 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 8:02:08 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 7:52:14 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:58:26 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

So you want both?

No. He said "or" not "and."

Ahem, the sentence that he used is:

'How many members are actually in favour of doing away with it or keeping it.'

You said 'me' to both.


Duh.

No, I said "me" to the question of whether we should do one or the other. I agree that we should do one or the other.
spacetime
Posts: 449
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 9:12:21 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 8:55:46 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 12/17/2015 8:21:56 PM, spacetime wrote:
I would say keep it.

The presidency does seem to be a somewhat superfluous institution, but at the very least, it serves two worthwhile purposes: (1) it motivates the president himself to launch more community initiatives than they otherwise would, and (2) it grants them some amount of soft power (among newer members, anyways), which can potentially make presidential initiatives more likely to succeed than regular ones. The "drama" argument is bad because half of that comes from the abolition movement, lol.

It's not just from the abolition movement. The drama stems from competitive elections and voter manipulation. Trust me, I was the king of that. When you have two competitive members running, it branches into secs which makes the site go crazy

Oh. My bad. I have only been around long enough to see the "drama" from this election, and it was almost entirely anarchist-driven.


(1) I would argue anyone that wants the community to be better has the same initiative as the president. There may be a tiny deal of accountability more with the president, but I think anyone is under the same motivation to participate in the community and make it work. If we don't , it dies more and more eventually to the point no one would want to use the site.

From what I've read, Bsh1 has repeatedly insisted that he wouldn't have taken the effort to do as much as he did (for example, his extensive debating guide) without being president.

The important question here is not whether he "could" he have done it -- it's whether he "would" have.


(2) I disagree with soft power, there is no power at all. Just a figure head and someone that is considered to be , by the majority the person newbies see as the "overhead figure" of DDO. It's virtually useless to older members, but it acts in a way that helps new members because its structured.

Yeah, which is why I added in "among newer members, anyways". I know that if I were new to a site, and I saw the site's president organizing an initiative of some sort, I would be more likely participate in that than some random member's initiative.

Funnily enough, all this public controversy over the presidency's existence is probably diminishing whatever limited soft power it had, even among newer members -- I know it has for me.
Call me King Pootie Tang.
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 9:13:52 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 8:10:29 PM, spacetime wrote:
At 12/17/2015 8:05:16 PM, YYW wrote:
Having this conversation is stupid.

Dismissing legitimate views offhand is stupid.

lol
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 9:20:07 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 9:12:03 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 8:02:08 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 7:52:14 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:58:26 PM, Emilrose wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:51:12 PM, TheGreatAndPowerful wrote:
At 12/17/2015 6:03:29 PM, Mikal wrote:
Just for a reference point. How many members are actually in favor of doing away with it or keeping it.

Me.

So you want both?

No. He said "or" not "and."

Ahem, the sentence that he used is:

'How many members are actually in favour of doing away with it or keeping it.'

You said 'me' to both.


Duh.

No, I said "me" to the question of whether we should do one or the other. I agree that we should do one or the other.

http://img.pandawhale.com...
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2015 9:22:32 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/17/2015 7:33:54 PM, XLAV wrote:
/keep

Because it creates drama and drama is always interesting to watch.

Yeah, same here. It's the only opportunity for people to let off steam and have a bit of cathartic release. The election doesn't create animosity so much as it allows animosity built up over the last half year to vent. An election without drama... now THAT would be useless.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -