Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

I'll let my opponent go first....

Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 7:29:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
NOO!!!

Ahem... sorry.

Listen, new debaters, please stop making debates where your entire R1 input is the resolution and "I'll let my opponent go first". This is lazy, a waste of a good resolution, and it hurts you.

1). It takes away your chance at having the first word. As the instigator, you obviously have a general idea of the ground you want to fight the debate on. Giving your opponent the first word is stupid, because you give up any control over the topic. A better debater can take that advantage and back you into a corner where you have no good arguments available. Don't give up the advantage of the first word!

2). It gives up the all-important definitions. The first definitions posted are used for the whole debate; if you give up the chance to define the debate, any troll can come along and define you out of options. It's called semantics, and a lot of n00bs lose their early debates because they didn't guard against people twisting their words.

3).It's lazy. Forcing your opponent to do all the work is just wrong; it's supposed to be your debate too, you know. If you don't care or know enough about the topic to write a decent R1, why are you debating it?

I don't know; am I the only one bothered by this? I'm going to be voting conduct against anyone who uses the tactic from now on, and I thought I'd bring it up for discussion.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 9:10:48 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
This is one, VERY good situation in which semantics should be used. It doesn't matter how experienced or inexperienced you are, if you don't know how to make an introduction, you deserve to be taught a lesson. This is a prerequisite for debating on this site: To know what you believe and to adequately present the idea.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Marauder
Posts: 3,271
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 9:45:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
though I completely agree with the point about posting your definitions first on this sight, I do see some reason for why debaters might wait for an opponents argument first instead of putting there own up there.

I think it's because its easier to argue as a con than a pro, it's easier to come up with a way to rebut rather than establish a case of your own. those who are still developing there debating skills might find that the preferable way to start training them, with negative cases rather than positive ones. But they also likely have specific topics they want to argue and that involves starting the debate rather than accepting one available.

But for the debate is always stronger if you do set up your case and I urge all noobs to take to your advice. I just wanted to point out that they are not necessarily lazy, just as beginners rebuttal may be there naturally preferred grounds for battle.
One act of Rebellion created all the darkness and evil in the world; One life of Total Obedience created a path back to eternity and God.

A Scout is Obedient.
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 10:57:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/28/2010 9:10:48 AM, Kleptin wrote:
This is one, VERY good situation in which semantics should be used. It doesn't matter how experienced or inexperienced you are, if you don't know how to make an introduction, you deserve to be taught a lesson. This is a prerequisite for debating on this site: To know what you believe and to adequately present the idea.

I know, but I thought some sort of public warning might help. If they know that such antics aren't considered good form, and they do it anyway, I'll be quite happy to take a debate on semantics. I just think there ought to be fair warning, that's all. This thread serves that purpose.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 12:26:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'll admit that I've been guilty of that in the past, but mostly because I'm terrible at creating good arguments. I am getting better though, slightly...
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 12:30:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Yep. I did this the first couple of debates I made. I prefer to post an opening round where the themes and rules of the debate are layed out, have my opponent agree in their round one and begin actual debating in round two.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Loserboi
Posts: 1,232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 11:35:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
and ehhh ill still go first even if they want me to... like if they ask me to go first ill just do it, no point in getting into a pointless argument on who was supposed to go first.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/28/2010 11:50:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I always make a solid introduction but I also try to be polite by giving my opponent the first argument. I know it doesn't help me in the debate but it makes me feel good to be polite. So there.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 12:00:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/28/2010 12:30:29 PM, tvellalott wrote:
Yep. I did this the first couple of debates I made. I prefer to post an opening round where the themes and rules of the debate are layed out, have my opponent agree in their round one and begin actual debating in round two.

That's different, though. If the first round is used by both sides for setting out and agreeing to terms, you (the initiator) are still going first when you post your opening argument in round two.
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 5:34:30 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/28/2010 11:34:20 PM, Loserboi wrote:
cant they make a topic which puts them as the CON of the situation and have the opposing person go first?

What, and have their opponent do all the work? No, if one makes a Con debate, he should open it with a Con argument. It's easy enough to toss out a resolution and disagree with the person defending it; it's your debate, you started it, now put some work into it.

Having Pro go first when one starts a debate as Con is like saying: "Hey, someone post something so I can tear it down? I'm too lazy to defend this idea myself, or to think up original ways to attack it, so could someone do my work for me?"
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
Loserboi
Posts: 1,232
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 1:21:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/29/2010 5:34:30 AM, Chrysippus wrote:
At 10/28/2010 11:34:20 PM, Loserboi wrote:
cant they make a topic which puts them as the CON of the situation and have the opposing person go first?

What, and have their opponent do all the work? No, if one makes a Con debate, he should open it with a Con argument. It's easy enough to toss out a resolution and disagree with the person defending it; it's your debate, you started it, now put some work into it.

Having Pro go first when one starts a debate as Con is like saying: "Hey, someone post something so I can tear it down? I'm too lazy to defend this idea myself, or to think up original ways to attack it, so could someone do my work for me?"

The argument over all of this has always been PRO has the burden of proof. IF your opponent does not want to do all the work than they should not have accepted the debate in the first place. If the first round clearly states that they want their opponent to go first, its stupid to accept and say HEY you are the one that needs to go first. They created the debate but usually the person accepting has to follow the rules made in the 1st round. The only rule made was the opponent goes first.
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 2:42:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
What makes me mad is when the Instigator of the debate is 'Con'. I mean, that's fvcking annoying. Title it in such a way that you are Pro, ok?

For example:

This way works:

The American Government Does Nothing -> And then the Instigator can be 'Pro'

This way DOES NOT work:

The American Government works -> And then the Instigator is 'Con'
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 2:53:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/28/2010 11:34:20 PM, Loserboi wrote:
cant they make a topic which puts them as the CON of the situation and have the opposing person go first?

Just my two cents, but if you're going to start a debate you should phrase the resolution in a way which makes you Pro. It's not hard to do, and you can do it to ANY resolution.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
sllewuy
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2010 4:21:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I don't like people accepting the debate and then instead of posting in the 1st round just saying "NO you have to go first!" that just seems unsportsmanlike to me... it clearly says they want you to go first. Why did you accept the debate when knowing that? I would vote conduct points on that. Guys it might be annoying for you to see, but it must be equally annoying the the person starting the debate, especially noobs who instead of posting in the 2nd round asks you to please start AGAIN and the person who accepts still won't post. It will eventually lead to the last round where nobody posts but everyone still votes for CON, which makes no sense to me.