The great debate ?

TheWolf

How about a debate forum? Have debates running on it where only those involved can post, maybe organise teams or something.

Lets boardsters argue in a productive way, rather than picking fights with admins. Just a vague idea, feel free to ignore me...

amp

That's what I'd like to think Humanities is for. Feel free to start a debate there. Of course it's open to all and sundry.

The teams thing is an interesting idea, but problematic due to the fact that some people can't post at certain times and such but it's still a good idea.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

"we only lost cos XXXXX was on their team!"


expect to see that posted alot...

TheWolf

Originally posted by amp
That's what I'd like to think Humanities is for. Feel free to start a debate there. Of course it's open to all and sundry.

The teams thing is an interesting idea, but problematic due to the fact that some people can't post at certain times and such but it's still a good idea.

Well, it could be broadend out to cover any subject.

Maybe to over come the posting time problem, teams could be informed of what times they can respond, eg told before the debate starts they have to reply, eg within a set time period. Or each member could specify when they could reply, and it could be built around that.

Like I said, vague idea, have'nt thought it out properly


(edit - crappy spelling)

Dustaz

Originally posted by TheWolf
Well, it could be broadend out to cover any subject.

Good idea! We could have seperate debate boards to cover lots of subjects, like Films and Music and Games!!! Maybe some wierder ones to provoke other types of debates, like politcal ones or ones about any Personal Issues you might have!

We could call them Debate.ie

I CANT BELIEVE noone thought of this before!

Wolf

^ pretty much what he said

Karl Hungus

Originally posted by Dustaz
Good idea! We could have seperate debate boards to cover lots of subjects, like Films and Music and Games!!! Maybe some wierder ones to provoke other types of debates, like politcal ones or ones about any Personal Issues you might have!

We could call them Debate.ie

I CANT BELIEVE noone thought of this before!

Shock horror!
And I thought Dustaz was just a spam garble bot of doom!

I agree with these sentiments thoroughly.

TheWolf

Sorry, should have made it clearer what I meant.

I was referring to debates in the sense where two teams argue against each other in a set amount of replies, and the one with the best arguement wins, ie someone judges them.

Professional arguing. How can we lose?

Maybe a league could be set up, or something?

davej

I think this is quite a good idea actually. Especially if people are forced to debate on the side of something that they don't actually agree with.

Eg: People from IOFFL put on the PRO side of the statement: "Eircom have done a lot of good for this country".

The main problem, as i see it, is that VBB doesn't really lend itself to allow a proper debating forum. There would have to be a lot of mod intervention to assign teams and make sure posts happen in the right order.

davej

DeVore

I had thought of this before... its not a bad idea alright (though to be fair to Dusty, I was going to give the same reply he did until you clarified it!)

Teams of three and then a public vote?

DeV.

TheWolf

Public vote could be via poll, keeps it simple. A or B, please tick one box only.

Maybe select a comittee of judges, ie respected boardsters, to vote on it?

Also, it would need a way to stop people throwing in their own comments, maybe you could restrict answering on threads except by those involved?

Sounds like a lot of work tbh, would people even be interested in it?

Trebor

i would be interested in watching it, not much of a debater myself but there is nothing more enjoyable than an intellagent controlled debate that is proven with fact's and links and not just the "it's true cause i say it's true" type of stuff that crops up.

DeVore

Yes. I think this will work. The tech can do it easily. It fits in with one of the triggers that made me want to start Boards with Cloud and Spin 3 years ago (a walk through Pompeii believe it or not).

Plus its going to earn me 200 quid... but you have to wait 12 months for that story

DeV.

bizmark

can i have some money mister vore i need a new pc lol

good damn amd toaster (aka duron)

maybe that could be your first debate the cost of new pc,s in ireland

davej

There would have to be an agreed structure to the debate.

For example, opening arguments, rebuttal(s), closing statements.

Maybe a set number of posts from each user/team and a set number of hours that the thread would remain open. This would encourage teams to be clear and concise with their replies.

davej

TheWolf

Originally posted by davej
For example, opening arguments, rebuttal(s), closing statements.

I was just thinking along those lines dave. If there is three members in a team, each member has to make one of the point's mentioned (opening argument, rebuttal, closing statement) which results in the whole team contributing.

This means if someone is not making the effort the team loses; therefore each member will work harder.

The set hours for each response could be built around what time each member says they can answer at, but would have to be loose enough to work.

As for who wins, each point by each member can be marked on

• Clarity of point
• How convincing it is
• How factual it is
• Illistrating points

Any other idea's? Should everyone judge these, or a set group?

A league between different teams could probably be arranged easily enough, also. Just depends on how many teams put their name down.

Anyone else have any comments?

Gordon

Why don't we have a debate about it?

Dustaz

ok, fair enough its actually not a bad idea


are spectators allowed post replies with STFU FAG0T in them?:)

davej

The set hours for each response could be built around what time each member says they can answer at, but would have to be loose enough to work.

I'd say set the the topic at the start of the week and let it run for 5 days. Maybe we could limit each team member to a maximum of 3 or 4 posts, including opening and closing statements.

I think the thread should be invisible/moderated until both teams have posted their opening arguments; that way the teams start off on an even footing. Once the time/max posts limit has been reached, moderate the thread again so that neither team can see each other's closing statements until they have both been posted.

We could rotate the topic through a number of the boards , for example, Politics, Humanities, Science, Broadband, Music.
That way we could get the mods of those boards involved in the fun!

As for who wins, each point by each member can be marked on

• Clarity of point
• How convincing it is
• How factual it is
• Illistrating points

I'd add humour to that list, we don't want it to too formal...
People can also have fun coming up with their team names!

davej

TheWolf

Originally posted by davej
I think the thread should be invisible/moderated until both teams have posted their opening arguments;

I'd add humour to that list, we don't want it to too formal...
People can also have fun coming up with their team names!

davej

Agreed, on both points. And dustaz is right, even if he is kidding, you can gaurantee someone who is not invovled will ignore the rules and try posting their opinion, maybe restrict posts like on the "Letters to the Editor forum?

Maybe authorize those on teams only to post on the forum?

Asuka

Sounds interesting alright

Id be interested in being involved in such a venture.

Plus its going to earn me 200 quid... but you have to wait 12 months for that story

Oh good, you can use that as a prize fund

A

DeVore

No! Sod Off!

Its going to the DeVore's Coke and Hookers Fund.

DeV.

bizmark

i guess that means no new pc

hooker,s sound good though

DeVore

Ok... having read your ideas (many of which are excellent) here's my initial suggestion:

We agree a topic as a community. Topic should be something relevant to Ireland today. For example the banning of smoking in pubs etc. the subject can be anything thats in the public eye.

Teams are put forward consisting of groups of 3 posters either for or against.

We'll select the teams and they will have 1 week to prepare. At the end of that week they will put forward their opening arguments through their captain. This will be pre-moderated until both are in. No more then 2 pages (I dont want enormous theses being posted and boring people to death).

The debate will last no more then a week (7 days) and each poster will be limited to one post per day. Thats no more then 21 posts per side per topic.

At the end of the week there will be closing statements/threads from the captains.

Everyone will have access to read that forum, (which will be called "Debate: Logos") and in parallel we will have another publically writeable forum called "Debate: Pathos" where everyone can have their say and take the debate into other directions, cheer for their team, talk about the debating chamber etc etc.
If you want to know why I'm calling them that, do a google or read this

I expect that the Logos board to have crystal clear debating with civility and maturity while the howling monkeys of passion can throw poo at each other on the Pathos board.

At the end we will have a poll and there will be two "prizes" to be won. The first is the Mobile Vulgus Award (which comes from roman days and directly translates as "the excitable, fickle populous!" and will be governed solely by popular voting.
The second will be the Senate award and will be judged by a subset of people, possibly the mods+admins, possibly by previous debaters, possibly by some other subset...

Which award you give greater credence/respect to is your own business. Neither has any intrinsic value over the other.

I'm going to ask Fergus Cassidy from the Tribune to mod it because I'm nicking my names from his Ethos website. Plus I think he'd be good at it and I have a personal reason for asking. 200 of them actually.

So, with this as a basis anyone wanna add or subtract anything from this infrastructure? There is something very *right* about this idea at its core though. I dont know if I've ever spoken about my trip to Pompeii before in relation to boards but this is very much part of it and an idea we were mulling over anyway...

what better time to make it go!?

DeV.

TheWolf

Sounds great Dev. Go for it!

bizmark

sounds fun to read all right:D

davej

Very good idea to use the Greek debating theme!

Teams are put forward consisting of groups of 3 posters either for or against.

I still think that it would be a nice idea for teams not to know in advance which side of the argument they will have to argue for. It might help some people see things in a new light if, for example, they have to come up with arguments supporting the case for war against Iraq when for the past year they've spent their time dissing the US on the politics board.


davej

DeVore

I was thinking about that. From my debating days I know that I never debated as well on a topic my heart wasnt committed to.
I take your point about perhaps seeing things from the other side but surely thats the oppositions job to do that!

I'm in two minds about this but I'm veering towards letting people sign up and be passionate about a topic.

DeV.

Boston

Originally posted by amp
That's what I'd like to think Humanities is for. Feel free to start a debate there. Of course it's open to all and sundry.

Humanities is for you to be a neo nazi anal anti social muppet on.

Gordon

Annoying, toi?

DeVore

You werent banned *again* were you Boston?

Anyway... back on topic, this aint about Humanities.

DeV.

DeVore

As an aside I have recounted the Pompeii thing in my journal. Its far too long and off topic for here.








<-- linkage

DeV.

Sparks

Sounds like it could be interesting DeVore. Mind you, I won't be taking part (the whole inability to choose whether you agree or disagree with the topic always annoyed me about academic debating).

Boston

No, i just don't like the way he moderates that forum, and i think he's a pleb, but thats another thread.

nice story DeVore, must give it a read.

Sparks

Must... bite... tongue...

Boston

I sent vexorg a pm asking could i bitch i that forum and he said i couldn't so you proably can't either. Amp is a real pain in the ass, and has a real hard on for me, had to be slapped down in the past.

ecksor

I suggest you two take your whinge to an appropriate forum/thread (in fact, Sparks already has) or I'll give you something else to complain about.

DeVore

As will I. This thread is important to me.

BACK on topic.


KThxBye.


Dev.

ecksor

To clarify (before I get any more indignant private messages) I didn't mean to post in the 'Fight the Power' forum, which is basically a dead forum now.

To clarify further, I'm not actually too bothered where you post your whinge (have a look at the other admin forums, you can work out for yourself what's suitable) or if you post it at all. Don't bring it up on this thread again.

DeVore

Originally posted by Sparks
Sounds like it could be interesting DeVore. Mind you, I won't be taking part (the whole inability to choose whether you agree or disagree with the topic always annoyed me about academic debating).

Er.... you WILL be able to choose, teams will form according to their beliefs so if you feel strongly about a topic up for debate you put your name forward as a potential debater FOR THAT SIDE.

I havent worked out the specifics yet but I think people debate better when they believe in the side they are debating on.

That clearer??

DeV.

Sparks

Yeah, it's clearer DeVore, but it's also completely different from every academic debate I ever took part in (a coin toss was the normal method for our debate side selection).

DeVore

yeah I dont like that method. Its supposed to test your ability to argue for things you dont actually believe in. Why you want such an ability I cant imagine.

Anyway, this wont be an academic debate, they should be real topics, current and meaningful in our lives.

One debate a month probably, I will see if we cant get one or two well known names to agree to involve themselves in the debates too. You never know who I might be able to strong arm!

DeV.

sceptre

Originally posted by DeVore
yeah I dont like that method. Its supposed to test your ability to argue for things you dont actually believe in. Why you want such an ability I cant imagine.

More a case of free weekends away (or free weeks away in other continents) with lots of free beer and chicks you can be guaranteed never to see again in my case than anything else.

Adjudication is easiest as you don't actually have to do any proper work and being sarcastic to people when they've left the room is part of the job:D

(Worlds are on in Singapore next year btw)


Why do people actually do it? Some are political types and want to develop their ability to lie, some reckon it'll look good on their CV. I liked the social aspect and so on (I can lie pretty well anyway, hate politicians and don't give a crap about my CV).

(edit: changed "perfectly" to "pretty well" in an attempt to come across as less of a cocky Cork cnut)

DeVore

Ok: Logos and Pathos are up. Noone can post in Logos just yet, but Pathos is open for business so we can discuss the details of how things will work.

DeV.

TheWolf

I have to thank TheWolf for spurring me to do this

Knew ya loved me Devvy-baby

bonkey

What an outstanding set of ideas.

Couple of points to consider :

1) Should people engaged in Logos also be allowed participate concurrently in Pathos, or should taking part in A Great Debate [tm] remove you from the discussion about said debate.

I think either way is workable - they each introduce their own interesting aspects - although I don't know how much effort putting such a restriction in place would involve from a modding/tech point of view.

2) Moderating of said fora could be a very interesting issue to fix policy on. Just as a debate would usually have a Chair, should we adopt a similar position in Pathos (i.e. a selected Chair per debate, rather than a permanent Chair), and with the Chair having some degree of participation in the event (although I'm struggling to come up with a good example of such participation).

On the other hand, there is a case to be made for Logos to be somewhat/mostly unmoderated. (Or maybe thats just asking for too much trouble)

In any case - and despite that I believe deVore's stance is that those who ask never receive - I'd like to put my marker down and offer to be involved in any way I can be made useful should there be any non-Admin-only moderatoring involved.

Either way....I'm looking forward to this.

jc

DapperGent

What a lovely idea.

From either the standpoint of a participant or interested onlooker this should be fascinating.

amp

I heartily endorse this product and/or service. It could grow into something quite big, reaching out into the real world (tm).

DadaKopf

Haven't read all this. Sounds great.

As for posts/rebuttals/whatever - word limit of 500 words, or a reasonable amount to be specified by the chair of the debate at the beginning for especially difficult topics.

I bags bonkey and shotamoose.