[MRiGnS]

suggested topic:


animal rights: murder or damage to property

[Big Dave]

Another suggested topic:

The death penalty


That one always has a lot of fierce debate, with good points from both sides. Always interesting to read.

[MRiGnS]

Originally Posted by Big Dave Another suggested topic: The death penalty That one always has a lot of fierce debate, with good points from both sides. Always interesting to read.

well, this topic is so boring as is it discussed way to often.

[Big Dave]

Originally Posted by MRiGnS well, this topic is so boring as is it discussed way to often.

...And that is what would make it perfect for a trial run!

Everybody has an opinion on it, it's usually an emotional topic and brilliant points are raised by people both pro- and anti-death penalty. It's the perfect topic.

[MRiGnS]

Originally Posted by Big Dave ...And that is what would make it perfect for a trial run! Everybody has an opinion on it, it's usually an emotional topic and brilliant points are raised by people both pro- and anti-death penalty. It's the perfect topic.

compare it with a television pilot, the audience needs something new, something spectacular to get carried along

[bns]

Alright guys. Sounds good. Keep posting ideas for topics.

I'll moderate the debates, if no one has any objections. Just because somebody has to so that it stays organized, and I am afterall a mod. I'll participate in the first one, but after that I probably won't participate much as long as there are plenty of others who are willing to give it a go. It sounds like it could be pretty fun and interesting.

[bns]

Here's how I see it going. If anyone has anything they would like to add or take away, please say so.

Each side will compose an opening statement. Each side will compose a rebuttal. If needed one or more rebuttals may be given---at the discretion of the moderator---equal numbers for each side. The idea is, if a point hasn't been covered, then you may address it, but no extra rebuttals just to rehash what has already been said. Then each side will compose a closing statement.

As to length, no strict requirement other than to be as concise as possible. We don't need 4-page posts. If it takes that long to make a point, then you're probably going to lose.

As to time, just be reasonable. In general, it would be nice if each participant posted within 24 hours of the beginning of the round, but I understand that things come up, so if you need 2 or 3 days that's fine. If you need 2 or 3 weeks, then you probably don't need to participate in that particular debate. No sense in being hard-ass about it though. It's supposed to be fun.

Watch your logical fallacies, in particular ad hominem. The forum rules still apply, so don't start name-calling. It's bad form for debate anyway.

For each debate, a discussion thread will be opened both as a free-for-all discussion of the issue, and a discussion of the merits of each side's arguments.

[Rasczak]

I have one more thing that would really help a lot I think. For each round, the two participants PM their arguments for that round to the debate moderator who posts both of them at the same time once s/he has both.

That way people can sort of take their time (within reason) composing their arguments, but no one has the advantage of constructing their argument based on what they've already seen from their opponent that round.

[bns]

That's good Rasczak. It also allows the moderator to make sure that the rules are followed clearly.

[Dies Irae]

Not to sound paranoid, but I don't particularly like the idea of a moderator checking each post before adding it, however, the idea of them being posted simultaneously so each post is a round is an interesting idea, whether or not it would actually work out ideally.

[mmccarthy]

I think it will work it its made clear to the mod that they don't have editing powers outside of questioning/editing the member on their rule breaking.

If the participant in the debate finds their post posted in an edited form when they weren't breaking the rules they have the right of appeal. At some point you need to trust the mods to do their job. If they show themselves as abusing this privilege there will always be recourse to that decision.

[mmccarthy]

One suggestion I could make on this particularly if bns is participating in the first debate is that we ask Vorian or compiledkernel as mods most of you are familiar with to preside over the first debate.

[bns]

Originally Posted by mmccarthy One suggestion I could make on this particularly if bns is participating in the first debate is that we ask Vorian or compiledkernel as mods most of you are familiar with to preside over the first debate.

Yeah. I was going to ask one of the other mods to do it for the first one. Any volunteers?

[bns]

Originally Posted by mmccarthy I think it will work it its made clear to the mod that they don't have editing powers outside of questioning/editing the member on their rule breaking.

That's exactly how I saw it. In fact, I was thinking that I would absolutely not edit any posts. Though it may be necessary to request someone to edit theirs, but only in cases of rule violations. But the post still belongs to the poster, not the mod.

[Rasczak]

Originally Posted by Dies Irae Not to sound paranoid, but I don't particularly like the idea of a moderator checking each post before adding it, however, the idea of them being posted simultaneously so each post is a round is an interesting idea, whether or not it would actually work out ideally.

Then don't participate in any debates with that rule set.

[Rasczak]

Originally Posted by mmccarthy I think it will work it its made clear to the mod that they don't have editing powers outside of questioning/editing the member on their rule breaking. If the participant in the debate finds their post posted in an edited form when they weren't breaking the rules they have the right of appeal. At some point you need to trust the mods to do their job. If they show themselves as abusing this privilege there will always be recourse to that decision.

Anyone who even wants to participate in this kind of format isn't going to be breaking rules. They might commit logical fallacies or something, but I don't think the moderators will edit or point those out - that's for the reader to judge.

[Dies Irae]

Originally Posted by Rasczak Then don't participate in any debates with that rule set.

I am not militantly opposed in the sense that I would refuse to participate in such debates, just I would find it preferable not to have a moderator checking each post before it is allowed to be added.

I agree with you that I doubt most people who participate in such a debate would break forum rules (a lesser percentage than the overall forum I imagine), which is partially why I'd prefer (in the cases of rules being broken) that the moderators treat it in the normal manner of editing/deleting/warning as they come across the post.

However, I realise if both sides of the debate are going to be posted at the same time, unless the moderator posting them intentionally doesn't peek (and asking that of anyone would be a little silly and pointless), then without much difficulty, I admit there probably wouldn't be another way.

----

From a purely aesthetic point, would it be possibly to perhaps have a specific account for posting debates and receiving posts from the people taking part in the debate? It may be slightly anal, but it would give the section some uniformity and given a related name would make it easy to distinguish between users/moderators and simply an account created for a specific purpose. Plus whichever moderator(s) wish to moderate debates would know that each private message on that account was for debate purposes only, rather than the moderator receiving the debate messages along with any general messages on their main account.

[mmccarthy]

Can I also suggest that if the posts are being posted by the moderators that the thread be closed so no one else can post.

[Dies Irae]

Originally Posted by mmccarthy Can I also suggest that if the posts are being posted by the moderators that the thread be closed so no one else can post.

If you were to create an account simply for posting debates, you could set the permissions to only allow that account to post in the forum.

Edit: Were it to have its own forum that is. I didn't give that part a glancing thought unfortunately.

[mmccarthy]

For the moment we are not using a new forum but posting in existing forums but its an idea for the future.