Challenge: can you argue the opposite side?

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:18 pm

Just to be sure we're all on the same page- as I read it, Poli will debate subsymbolic on the topic 'Does the Christian God exist?' with Poli taking the negative. Who wants to begin?

And we'll set up a Peanut Gallery in Religion, where anyone who wants can argue the reverse of their actual beliefs, if they so choose.

Is that suitable to everyone?

Politesse · Post by **Politesse** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:50 pm

That is acceptable. Lulu and Koy have proposed a similar debate of their own, I think in its own thread.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:44 pm

Since Jason isn't about, seems I will have to moderate this debate. Bear with me, please, as I'm a complete novice at this!

I still need to know who makes the opening post, how long a time you want between responses, and how long a grace period there will be for overdue posts. (I would suggest 3 days spacing, and a further 3 days grace period. But those can easily be made longer or shorter.)

added- And what length limit do you want to put on each post, if any?

I'll set up the debate between Koy and Lulu as a separate debate thread, but since it's going to be on the same topic, I presume, we'll use this thread for setup. Koy, Lulu, same questions to you guys. Who begins, how long do you want between entries? And do you want the same thread name? (We could call the debates "Does the Christian God exist? (#1)" and "Does the Christian God exist? (#2)", if you want.)

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 2:59 pm

[quote=""Jobar""]Since Jason isn't about, seems I will have to moderate this debate. Bear with me, please, as I'm a complete novice at this!

I still need to know who makes the opening post, how long a time you want between responses, and how long a grace period there will be for overdue posts. (I would suggest 3 days spacing, and a further 3 days grace period. But those can easily be made longer or shorter.)

I'll set up the debate between Koy and Lulu as a separate debate thread, but since it's going to be on the same topic, I presume, we'll use this thread for setup. Koy, Lulu, same questions to you guys. Who begins, how long do you want between entries? And do you want the same thread name? (We could call the debates "Does the Christian God exist? (#1)" and "Does the Christian God exist? (#2)", if you want.)[/quote]

I don't know. Jobar. My thing is my time will be very limited during the week, and I will be much more able to do this on the weekends.

As for format, I was looking to you guys for guidance.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:06 pm

As for format, I was looking to you guys for guidance.

The blind leading the blind, forsooth!

No, really, you and Koy can set up the timing as suits you. For instance, you can have a week to write the opening post, then a week after it's up to enter the next one, with a 3-day (or more) grace period before the debate is declared over. You can limit the length for each entry, or not. (Ah, just let me warn you, I know Koy can be exceptionally long winded. I advise you to insist on a length limit of three thousand words a post.)

Koyaanisqatsi · Post by **Koyaanisqatsi** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:53 pm

Though if Poli and sub are going to debate the same topic role-reversal-wise, it seems a bit redundant for Lulu and I to do the same thing.

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:59 pm

[quote=""Koyaanisqatsi""]

Though if Poli and sub are going to debate the same topic role-reversal-wise, it seems a bit redundant for Lulu and I to do the same thing.[/quote]

Maybe we could do it as a debate team instead.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:12 pm

That would work. No rule that says there only have to be two participants, after all.

Politesse · Post by **Politesse** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:12 pm

We had floated the idea of doing debates on separate topics, though.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:23 pm

Well, I would say that the basic dispute here- for all concerned- is over the existence/nonexistence of (the Christian) god. But of course there are many side paths to the central question. Lulu, Koy, do you two want to debate some alternative or subsidiary question? For example, you might debate over the nature of Jesus Christ; was he man, or was he God in flesh?

Understand, I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do, but we do have to all be clear on what's being debated, and by who.

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:28 pm

I am fine either way. Whatever Koy wants to do.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:33 pm

Oh yes, one more thing we need to decide- how long do the discussions go on? Usually we see 3 rounds- argument, counter-argument, rebuttal, counter-rebuttal, then a closing statement from each side. But that also is flexible, and we need not set a specific length to the debate, if you all want to keep going.

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 6:58 pm

"Team A -- Five Minutes: Introduction to argument

Team B -- Three Minutes: Rebuttal of Team A introduction.

Team A -- Two Minutes: Rebuttal of Team B statement.

Team A -- 15 Minutes: Main statements

Tea m B -- 10 Minutes: Cross examination

Team B -- 15 Minutes: Main statements

Team A -- 10 Minutes: Cross examination

"Team A -- Eight Minutes: Closing argument

Team B -- Eight Minutes: Closing argument

So substitute number of words allowed.

I would also ask that the points be numbered so to easier counter the other one.

I think it is also wise to allow the "moderator" to define phrases or words in dispute.

For example, if one uses the phrase eternal damanation, rather than allowing the technicality of the phrase become the central focus, allow a sidebar between the debaters and the moderators to define the phrase. The moderator has the final say.

(My highschool debate team stuff is coming back)

I was once defeated by the State Champ because he argued that the USSR was not a communist country but a socialistic totalitarianism. I do not like losing on a technicality.

So, allowing these sidebards to define phrases is not standard debate rules, but I think it would be beneficial here. I would hate for Koy to lose because he uis confused between the words agnostic, atheist and non-believer and to see the debate devolve into a wordsmith war.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:44 pm

We could set it up as 3 rounds- each round consisting of a post, then a reply. And leave the option to extend it further, if both sides are amenable.

Politesse, subsymbolic- let's do a small test run, to make sure I am good to go running a fully-moderated forum, mainly. I'm going to start a thread in the Debates forum, and you two make a short post there- just 'testing, testing' or the like, OK?

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:24 pm

I want to offer apologies to Poli and subsymbolic (and Lulu and Koy also) for not keeping up with this, after saying I would. This time of year is usually my busiest, and RL responsibilities have been running me ragged!

However, I think I now have all the technical end of things figured out, and hopefully we can now proceed, with the help of the other admins. We still need to decide if it's a single debate with two on each side, or two debates; and also who goes first, and the other details mentioned in the previous few posts. Those things have to be done by the participants; I'm just the chauffeur, not the one picking the destination!

Politesse · Post by **Politesse** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:49 pm

Um, I'd rather have separate debates, myself. Last time I was on a team I accidentally decked my debate partner with an encyclopedia on stage.

phands · Post by **phands** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:53 pm

[quote=""Politesse""]Um, I'd rather have separate debates, myself. Last time I was on a team I accidentally decked my debate partner with an encyclopedia on stage.[/quote]

Photos needed!!!

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:04 pm

lmfao! Yes, I would definitely like to see that!

subsymbolic · Post by **subsymbolic** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:36 pm

I think both poli and I have had a few ideas percolating for a one to one. I think we agreed 750 word max for the position, 500 for objections and 500 for rebuttals. I'm happy to change this but it works for me.

Politesse · Post by **Politesse** » Sun Mar 31, 2013 9:11 pm

Yup, I think that's what we settled on. Want to go first, sub?

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:34 am

[quote=""Politesse""]Um, I'd rather have separate debates, myself. Last time I was on a team I accidentally decked my debate partner with an encyclopedia on stage.[/quote]

OK, that's one question answered. Now, who starts off, you or subsymbolic?

(I might advise that sub, arguing the affirmative here, should begin.)

And Lulu and Koy, you two are still welcome to debate the same question, in a different thread. Or, pick one of the many other questions which surround this topic.

Lulu · Post by **Lulu** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:35 am

[quote=""Jobar""]

Politesse;454252 wrote:Um, I'd rather have separate debates, myself. Last time I was on a team I accidentally decked my debate partner with an encyclopedia on stage.

OK, that's one question answered. Now, who starts off, you or subsymbolic?

(I might advise that sub, arguing the affirmative here, should begin.)

And Lulu and Koy, you two are still welcome to debate the same question, in a different thread. Or, pick one of the many other questions which surround this topic.[/QUOTE]

Let's let this one go for awhile. I have a lot going on right now in my real life. I want to be able to dedicate some time to ours.

Jobar · Post by **Jobar** » Mon Apr 01, 2013 1:51 am

No problem- I'm not trying to rush anyone.

If I had realized that Redshirt wasn't going to come around and handle this, we would have set it up ten days ago, or more. So I'd be calling the kettle black if I asked anyone to hurry, aye?