Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Challenge to the imabench campaign.

Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

http://www.debate.org... - Post #3

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter. We have heard nothing from imabench - the abolitionist campaign head. So there are 1 of 2 conclusions to be made:

1) The NOTA campaign is serious and imabench believes that he would lose a debate on the comparative strength of our campaigns.

2) imabench is too cowardly to enter a debate to defend an assertion his campaign publically stated about another campaign. On a debating website. For which he is campaigning to change the self governance policy.

So is he dishonest or a craven?

Either way, this casts great aspersions on his platform because it is clear evidence of faulty judgment. How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site when he has shown himself to be either intellectually dishonest or incapable of defending his position.

So I call on imabench to be intellectually honest and either debate me on our platforms or admit that NOTA is a superior platform to his and that he is afraid to subject his platform to real competition.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:10:11 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
^ ignore the retard
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:53:07 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

You propose replacing the presidency with a monarchy that allows anybody who spams debates and forums to effectively become
Ruler of the site with zero specifications of what a king would even be able to do

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter.

Which I declined, since beating the mentally handicapped is illegal in the state of Florida, in addition to the fact that I very publicly announced my retirement from debating after doing 600 of them

How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site

For starters I can just point to you and all the other trolls/retards who are running to show that the presidency is just an overblown popularity contest people run for just for attention ;)
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 6:00:00 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:53:07 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

You propose replacing the presidency with a monarchy that allows anybody who spams debates and forums to effectively become
Ruler of the site with zero specifications of what a king would even be able to do

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter.

Which I declined, since beating the mentally handicapped is illegal in the state of Florida, in addition to the fact that I very publicly announced my retirement from debating after doing 600 of them

How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site

For starters I can just point to you and all the other trolls/retards who are running to show that the presidency is just an overblown popularity contest people run for just for attention ;)

So no actual debate? Is this a debating website or not?
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 10:00:36 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

http://www.debate.org... - Post #3

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter. We have heard nothing from imabench - the abolitionist campaign head. So there are 1 of 2 conclusions to be made:

1) The NOTA campaign is serious and imabench believes that he would lose a debate on the comparative strength of our campaigns.

2) imabench is too cowardly to enter a debate to defend an assertion his campaign publically stated about another campaign. On a debating website. For which he is campaigning to change the self governance policy.

So is he dishonest or a craven?

Either way, this casts great aspersions on his platform because it is clear evidence of faulty judgment. How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site when he has shown himself to be either intellectually dishonest or incapable of defending his position.

So I call on imabench to be intellectually honest and either debate me on our platforms or admit that NOTA is a superior platform to his and that he is afraid to subject his platform to real competition.

I'll take you, but in an open thread debate a little first then we can go to legit debate.

Ima bench supporter.

#UnbenchtheBench
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 10:03:32 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

http://www.debate.org... - Post #3

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter. We have heard nothing from imabench - the abolitionist campaign head. So there are 1 of 2 conclusions to be made:

1) The NOTA campaign is serious and imabench believes that he would lose a debate on the comparative strength of our campaigns.

You know there are a billion other variables, right?

2) imabench is too cowardly to enter a debate to defend an assertion his campaign publically stated about another campaign. On a debating website. For which he is campaigning to change the self governance policy

I will gladly proxy for him.

So is he dishonest or a craven?

Neither

Either way, this casts great aspersions on his platform because it is clear evidence of faulty judgment. How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site when he has shown himself to be either intellectually dishonest or incapable of defending his position.

What if he simply doesn't feel like it?

And he isn't powerful with the semantics.

So I call on imabench to be intellectually honest and either debate me on our platforms or admit that NOTA is a superior platform to his and that he is afraid to subject his platform to real competition.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 11:08:37 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 6:00:00 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:53:07 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

You propose replacing the presidency with a monarchy that allows anybody who spams debates and forums to effectively become
Ruler of the site with zero specifications of what a king would even be able to do

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter.

Which I declined, since beating the mentally handicapped is illegal in the state of Florida, in addition to the fact that I very publicly announced my retirement from debating after doing 600 of them

How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site

For starters I can just point to you and all the other trolls/retards who are running to show that the presidency is just an overblown popularity contest people run for just for attention ;)

So no actual debate? Is this a debating website or not?

Read the reply you illiterate dipsh**
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 11:12:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 10:03:32 AM, Dragon_of_Christ wrote:

I will gladly proxy for him.

And he isn't powerful with the semantics.

Dragon if you could go sit in a corner and color or wander out into the middle of traffic that would be fantastic
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 11:13:42 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 11:12:01 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:03:32 AM, Dragon_of_Christ wrote:

I will gladly proxy for him.

And he isn't powerful with the semantics.

Dragon if you could go sit in a corner and color or wander out into the middle of traffic that would be fantastic

No.

I am for yr campain and against his.

I used #NOTAchance. XD
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 11:08:37 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 6:00:00 AM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:53:07 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 3:49:28 AM, Geogeer wrote:
On Monday night NOTA released its platform. imabench (head of the abolitionist campaign) chose of his own volition to post on the NOTA campaign page that NOTA was a troll platform.

You propose replacing the presidency with a monarchy that allows anybody who spams debates and forums to effectively become
Ruler of the site with zero specifications of what a king would even be able to do

We immediately challenged imabench to defend his opinion in a debate on the matter.

Which I declined, since beating the mentally handicapped is illegal in the state of Florida, in addition to the fact that I very publicly announced my retirement from debating after doing 600 of them

How can he reassure voters that his abolitionist platform is the correct path forward for the site

For starters I can just point to you and all the other trolls/retards who are running to show that the presidency is just an overblown popularity contest people run for just for attention ;)

So no actual debate? Is this a debating website or not?

Read the reply you illiterate dipsh**

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Just like in your platform, you lack any imagination on a different way to get things done. I'll give you a way out of your self imposed limitation, you can keep your precious big round number and we can debate right here. We have a platform that gives 8000 characters (including spaces) - 3 or 4 rounds should suffice.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 4:55:23 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.

Isn't that what I just proposed doing, but in a formal manner where each side builds a proper case of points and issues which are presented in a comprehensive manner and proper rebuttals can be read and evaluated instead of getting lost in the threaded back and forths?

I think the voters deserve real clarity not snippets of arguments.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 4:59:18 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 4:55:23 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.

Isn't that what I just proposed doing

No, because you want to put a cap limit on your arguments so that after 3 or 4 posts you can crown yourself the winner and make a complete idiot out of yourself, wasting my time and everyone else's in the process.

If you have objections to my platform, say so, and I'll happily tear you a new one while answering
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:04:00 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 4:59:18 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:55:23 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.

Isn't that what I just proposed doing

No, because you want to put a cap limit on your arguments so that after 3 or 4 posts you can crown yourself the winner and make a complete idiot out of yourself, wasting my time and everyone else's in the process.

If you have objections to my platform, say so, and I'll happily tear you a new one while answering

Make it 20 rounds then? I really don't care how long it is, so long as it remains a formal presentation that can be easily followed by all.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:07:02 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:04:00 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:59:18 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:55:23 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.

Isn't that what I just proposed doing

No, because you want to put a cap limit on your arguments so that after 3 or 4 posts you can crown yourself the winner and make a complete idiot out of yourself, wasting my time and everyone else's in the process.

If you have objections to my platform, say so, and I'll happily tear you a new one while answering

Make it 20 rounds then? I really don't care how long it is, so long as it remains a formal presentation that can be easily followed by all.

The fact that you still havent even proposed any arguments against my platform shows youre not really serious or a serious candidate
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:21:05 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:07:02 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:04:00 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:59:18 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:55:23 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 4:49:06 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 1:10:31 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I did read it, and I wanted to give you the opportunity to rethink your position. What you are telling me and everyone else on the site is that your precious round number is more important to you that the necessary structural change to the site governance that you are campaigning to implement. That is the depth of your campaign.

Its funny how you denounce me for being intellectually dishonest when the mountains of bullsh*t being spewn out of your mouth throughout this thread indicate youre the one being dishonest. If you want to challenge my platform against yours, grow some testicles and we can hash it out here in the forums for all of my supporters and your one supporter to see for themselves.

Isn't that what I just proposed doing

No, because you want to put a cap limit on your arguments so that after 3 or 4 posts you can crown yourself the winner and make a complete idiot out of yourself, wasting my time and everyone else's in the process.

If you have objections to my platform, say so, and I'll happily tear you a new one while answering

Make it 20 rounds then? I really don't care how long it is, so long as it remains a formal presentation that can be easily followed by all.

The fact that you still havent even proposed any arguments against my platform shows youre not really serious or a serious candidate

I've merely been considerate enough to not clog up your announcement page - it is called having class. I'm merely setting up a proper forum for debate between 2 candidates on a debate website. There we can properly engage each other's campaigns in one place where the voters can read it all. Pretty reasonable.

I think the same should be done for all candidates to debate each other.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:26:26 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:21:05 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I'm merely setting up a proper forum for debate between 2 candidates on a debate website.

No you're not. You're a classless swine who made a callout thread accusing me of multiple things that aren't true just because I have refused to give you the attention you don't even deserve in the first place. You haven't once made any attempt to contact me or PM me personally asking for any kind of debate, and you instead opted to spam threads and posts to try to make yourself seem relevant in the election when you simply aren't.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:30:32 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 11:12:01 AM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 10:03:32 AM, Dragon_of_Christ wrote:

I will gladly proxy for him.

And he isn't powerful with the semantics.

Dragon if you could go sit in a corner and color or wander out into the middle of traffic that would be fantastic

I leik pancakes.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:36:32 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:26:26 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:21:05 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I'm merely setting up a proper forum for debate between 2 candidates on a debate website.

No you're not. You're a classless swine who made a callout thread accusing me of multiple things that aren't true just because I have refused to give you the attention you don't even deserve in the first place. You haven't once made any attempt to contact me or PM me personally asking for any kind of debate, and you instead opted to spam threads and posts to try to make yourself seem relevant in the election when you simply aren't.

Lol. You began this whole thing by calling my campaign a troll. I immediately challenged you to a debate and let it sit for a couple of days with no reply.

So will you or won't you debate? I fail to see the difficulty here.
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:41:44 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:36:32 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:26:26 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:21:05 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I'm merely setting up a proper forum for debate between 2 candidates on a debate website.

No you're not. You're a classless swine who made a callout thread accusing me of multiple things that aren't true just because I have refused to give you the attention you don't even deserve in the first place. You haven't once made any attempt to contact me or PM me personally asking for any kind of debate, and you instead opted to spam threads and posts to try to make yourself seem relevant in the election when you simply aren't.

Lol. You began this whole thing by calling my campaign a troll.

Because it is a troll, as evidenced by the nil support it currently has

I immediately challenged you to a debate and let it sit for a couple of days with no reply.

You posted a link to A debate that was not aimed at me specifically or anyone else for that matter.

So will you or won't you debate?

Ive asked you several times to name any problems you have with my platform in this thread right here, yet you're too chicken sh*t to do it, indicating that you are indeed just a troll, and a sh*t one at that as well.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/12/2016 5:49:17 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/12/2016 5:41:44 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:36:32 PM, Geogeer wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:26:26 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/12/2016 5:21:05 PM, Geogeer wrote:

I'm merely setting up a proper forum for debate between 2 candidates on a debate website.

No you're not. You're a classless swine who made a callout thread accusing me of multiple things that aren't true just because I have refused to give you the attention you don't even deserve in the first place. You haven't once made any attempt to contact me or PM me personally asking for any kind of debate, and you instead opted to spam threads and posts to try to make yourself seem relevant in the election when you simply aren't.

Lol. You began this whole thing by calling my campaign a troll.

Because it is a troll, as evidenced by the nil support it currently has

Funny, there are people I've PM'd with who like it a lot and are still deciding. It is a solid #2 for them and they are giving it real consideration.

I immediately challenged you to a debate and let it sit for a couple of days with no reply.

You posted a link to A debate that was not aimed at me specifically or anyone else for that matter.

lol. What do I have to roll out the red carpet? An invitation to debate is an invitation to debate.

So will you or won't you debate?

Ive asked you several times to name any problems you have with my platform in this thread right here, yet you're too chicken sh*t to do it, indicating that you are indeed just a troll, and a sh*t one at that as well.

Very well, I suppose that is the closest that you'll come to debating. I will post tonight when I have time to properly compose something.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 7:19:16 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
My apologies for taking so long to get back to you. Real life had demands.

I've moved this here where it should have been.

At 5/18/2016 6:21:15 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/10/2016 5:50:46 AM, Geogeer wrote:

I have refrained from critiquing other platforms in their own threads and ask for the same respect in return.

You criticized my platform in your thread so you shall not be granted that respect.

Like you have shown any respect to anyone, and I did not critique your platform - I shared my general opinion of it - a distinct difference.

Preamble

The DDO presidency is now a bad design and the current plan to abolish the presidency is a bad and lazy design.

Simply saying its bad doesnt make it true. Explain why its bad and Ill happily blow apart your arguments.

The existing presidency has become a popularity contest and attempts to craft the site into the desire of individual members instead of permitting organic development.

Your abolitionist campaign is lazy because it merely adopts a direct democracy element to the site. However, the site has no charter or constitution that would limit these implementations. And without Juggle present there is no real limitations as to what would be implemented with the exception of Airmax's personal decision to not permit certain things from being done. Particularly toxic is a mob rule too ban people from the site.

With the ability to implement multiple changes at once the process is subject to a mob mentality whereby popular movements could result in sweeping changes taking place all at once, or some ideas not being thoroughly vetted prior to voting due to too much being done at once. This is why I limit the number of changes, but decrease the time frame between votes. It forces people to focus on just one or two changes with time between implementation and the next vote.

You have to get people to agree on the wording of each resolution in each corresponding thread, with no interrelationship between the ideas being proposed. As such you could end up with 2 different resolutions, pushed by different "camps" both being passed with contradictory measures in them.

The problem is that both the pro-presidency and strict abolitionist platforms are the wrong solutions; what is needed is a third way.

You have failed to even cite a single reason why a third way is needed and why the other solutions are somehow 'wrong'.

Both solutions are geared directly to popularity contests on the site and do nothing to actually increase the amount of debating and voting being completed - the whole reason for the site to exist.

The Platform

Thus, I propose to abolish the DDO Presidency and replace it with a Monarchy! However, it is not a monarchy in the sense of ruling, but more as a titular head who serves the community, with very limited powers.

Then that doesnt make them a monarch, since monarchs rule over communities rather then try to serve them, and very rarely have any checks on their authority which is wide sweeping.

Lol. You are seriously making this argument? I noted that the monarch title was for fun in the campaign, and that the community could decide on the title after the election. And you would be wrong on the power of Monarchs in the modern world. The queen of England is Canada's monarch, but she actually holds no power. Her role is strictly titular.

The duties of the Monarch are simple

1) Debates that end in a tie can be appealed to the monarch for a victor to be declared.

This serves no purpose to the site whatsoever and the monarch's opinion holds no sway in deciding who is the official winner of the debate.

And yet it does serve a purpose. None of my last 3 debates (one of which was an official tournament debate) was voted on. Now that doesn't bother me, but I know my opponents wanted some form of feed back. They got none. The tournament could only proceed because I decided to let my opponent advance.

There are legitimate times that this is needed or should be available. This appeal could also be made while a debate under a draw condition with voting time left was made. Sure the official win/loss is important, however feedback on drawn debates can also be highly valuable for the debaters.

It won't show as an official result, but it will settle the issue for the debaters.

Unless the monarch is suddenly no longer the monarch. Any pointless 'ruling' they give on a debate will lose any authority it has behind it when someone else becomes the monarch.

It is a one time thing for purposes of acknowledging efforts that may have otherwise been overlooked. Many people want the feedback even if it never shows in the win/loss column. Not everyone's focus is so small.

2) To be active in the community. The Monarch must partake in a minimum of 6 rounds of debating (not including acceptance or forfeited rounds) every month.

This allows for spam debates to be allowed, and in fact encouraged.

You know what used to make this site engaging? Popular debaters engaging in lots of debates. The chance for some noob to be debating one of the top debaters. It made the site lively and engaging. Were some of those not much better than spam debates? Sure. Were many of them good debates? Definitely.

I have faith in this community, and that people's personal integrity would result in the monarch drawing interest in more total and more quality debates. You apparently lack trust in the members of this site.

The remainder of the Monarchy works on a tick tock system.

3) The tick is that every "even" month the monarch defends his/her crown from the most prominent challenger (warrior-king). All would be challengers put forth their claims to challenge, with the most prestigious challenger having the right to debate the monarch in a trial by arms for the crown.

lol, and how is the 'most prestigious' challenger selected? You provide no means of selecting who this challenger would be, and the person who might be the most 'prestigious' may not even be interested in being the monarch...

Simple the determination of the most worthy challenger was presented in the second post of my campaign:

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

Anyone, who wanted to challenge would enter their name and show list the 6 criteria.

e.g.
Geogeer
9 debate rounds - last 2 months
6 debate rounds voted - last 2 months
2 years on site
30 total debates
312 total votes
3392 forum posts

Challenge score: 3.87

The challenger with the best score would win the right to challenge.

- This system encourages active debating and voting as these are the only means of being able to challenge for the title of Monarch.

In other words it encourages spam debates and voting blocs. Both of which extremely bad for the site.

That would make you an ideal challenger - having completed 600 debates!

Older members are less likely to be spammers, they have better things to do. And what does it matter - it is a titular position, and one created to create interest. As for voting, it doesn't matter if you win or lose the debates, only that you have completed debates. Given the propensity of noobs to forfeit debates, forfeited debates don't count. So members would be better served by creating compelling debates to participate in.

Were Mikal's rap debates great debates? No, but they added something because it made top debaters accessible to those just joining the site. Were half the debates going on exemplary in nature? No, but they were real open debates. These days, most debates by better debaters are closed debates where they are closed in order to select a challenger, etc... and in my opinion it is killing the site. While much of what occurred before was less than spectacular
Geogeer
Posts: 4,296
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/24/2016 7:19:47 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Part 2.

At 5/18/2016 6:21:15 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/10/2016 5:50:46 AM, Geogeer wrote:

4) The tock is that every "odd" month the monarch puts forth legislation to be voted on. The people put forward petitions on which laws to enact. The most popular of which must be put to a vote. The monarch may also choose one additional piece of legislation to put forward for a vote.


- This enable up to 12 governance changes to be made to the site every year - which should be plenty. It also allows for a slow change with a limited number of changes to be made at once. Thus each change can be thoroughly discussed and then evaluated prior to making the next change.

12 governance changes in an entire year would be the exact opposite of a 'slow change', where each change debated once under one monarch could be debated all over again under a new monarch one month later, essentially throwing open the doors to chaos to take over the site

The soonest time would be 2 months later to reconsider a vote. There could be zero governance changes as well. If the majority of the people vote no change, then no legislation would be voted on. Additionally it allows the site to try something on a short term basis and nix it if it doesn"t work. In reality I expect little to happen. However, it would enable quicker decisions on items like vote moderation to be tweaked more quickly than the prolonged discussions taking place right now. Make a little change, have a few debates, get voted on and see if you like it or not. If so great, if not it can be tweaked again in a couple of months.

This way people don"t get disenfranchised, but rather can make the minor alterations as needed.

How to be dethroned:

If the Monarch fails to judge the debates (s)he is obligated to judge, or fails to participate in the number of debates (s)he is supposed to, then the Monarch is said to have abdicated the throne. The two most prominent challengers then debate to determine who will wear the crown.

Again, no means for selecting who is the most 'prominent' is listed. By the time these 2 are even selected and debate, the next monarch selection would be 2 weeks away, since debates themselves can easily last two weeks longs depending on the number of rounds and response time that is allowed.

My environment was that their requirements were the average of the 2 months they were in. Stuff comes up, so if you cannot get all the debates you need to do in one month, you can do extra in your second month. This means that the only time the monarch is deposed outside of the regular schedule is if the members vote him out.

I can only see the members voting him out if tournaments cannot be resolved because (s)he refuses to decide the winner in a draw or he is someone who spammed their way in and the members want them out.

The people may vote to overthrow a monarch with a 60% vote. The two most prominent challengers then debate to determine who will wear the crown.

Once again, no means of selecting who is the most 'prominent'

You were really overly fixated on this, weren"t you?

It would build community, reduce drama, reduce bureaucracy, enable measured direct governance of the site,

It would certainly NOT reduce drama since you risk having new leadership once a month with members pushing for legislation changes around the clock. It is also not direct governance of the site since the Monarch gets to veto whatever they want

Funny, under my platform there is no veto power for the monarch. Could you please describe where you read that the monarch had veto power? A quote would be nice if you don"t mind.

And what is funny is that under your system there is the possibility of literally dozens of changes proposed every 6 months at the conventions. As noted if the majority of people vote for no change to governance, then there would be no site initiated change voted on.

and reward those who put in the most time to the site.

aka those who spam the most.

So you would be the first challenger after 2 months? Okay by me.


How does it get implemented?

By voting NOTA (None of the Above), the site will signal a revolution against the office of the President. The revolution would abolish the presidency and institute the DDO Monarchy.

Merely winning the election would not implement the monarchy. You wold need the full support of the mods to implement the monarchy and not host any more presidency threads, while also convincing the DDO population that they now live under authority of a king rather than a president instead, which wont go over very well since most people on DDO are americans who hate the idea of living under a monarchy.

Lol. You are really hung up on the king thing. Airmax has told me he would work with me to implement it if won. If people wanted the presidency back, they could vote on it - simple enough.

I assume that people on DDO are smart enough to realize that they are not living under a king despite your wonderful attempt to mischaracterize it as such.

The monarch acts as a judge to help debaters, as a competitor for members,a and as a chairman for self governance. If you want to call the position chairman - I really don"t care. Besides it is way more fun to compete to be king!

Your platform is completely un-implementable, would only unleash a tsunami of drama on the site, and cause far more problems than it would solve. Its arguable that this system wouldnt solve ANY problem the site currently faces.

No platform can solve the problems on this site alone. Active participation is required to solve the problems on this site. This is the only platform that creates conditions to increase participation and reduce popularity contests. It places the focus on debate - the place where it should be.