Debater Nomination Topic

Zero Beat · May 5, 2009

Well not really.

Typing in lower case is always excused if your posts have substance. It just looks terrible if you don't know what you're talking about.

RDK · May 5, 2009

It's fine as long as it doesn't get too sloppy. Remember Snex? He's a perfect example of when sloppiness is excusable.

Edit: if I had to come up with a preliminary list, it would be this:

Vickey
w!zard
Nysyarc

This seems to be a promising group.

~ Gheb ~ · May 9, 2009

What do you think about S.O.L.I.D.?

RDK · May 9, 2009

Gheb_01 said:
What do you think about S.O.L.I.D.?

Oops, I forgot to include him to. He seems like a solid debater.

...

Yeah, that was bad.

DtJ Jungle · May 9, 2009

*facepalm*

I like solid, vickey and nysyarc. Those three seem to have a feel for what to do.

Maniclysane · May 13, 2009

Solid, t3h n00b, and I'll suggest w!zard again. All of them are good enough. Vickey too. Even though I don't agree with anything she says, she would be a good debater. ._.

Aesir · May 14, 2009

We need more moderates/conservatives in this board.

Way to many libertarians/progressives/liberals.

blazedaces · May 14, 2009

Aesir said:
We need more moderates/conservatives in this board.

Way to many libertarians/progressives/liberals.

That's because it's an online forum, so the following is true about people who roam these boards:

-They tend to be more technologically apt.
-They tend to be younger
-They tend to play video games

All three are related, obviously. Still, the fact you mentioned should come to no surprise to you once you realize this.

-blazed

Vorguen · May 14, 2009

As of now am I the only one with conservative views? lol

blazedaces · May 14, 2009

Vorguen said:
As of now am I the only one with conservative views? lol

Do you mean the only one nominated? There are a few others on the board sharing those views...

-blazed

Vorguen · May 14, 2009

I mean in the official Debate Hall.

It's hard to keep up with so many anarchy-seeking-terror-loving-neck-snapping-rage-inducing lefties in this room.

We need more conservative.

*Praises Allah*

blazedaces · May 14, 2009

Vorguen said:
I mean in the official Debate Hall.

It's hard to keep up with so many anarchy-seeking-terror-loving-neck-snapping-rage-inducing lefties in this room.

We need more conservative.

*Praises Allah*

Delorted is fairly conservative, but he's the only one I can think of at the moment. Still... I haven't been here a while myself...

As I said before though, I highly doubt it'll change anytime soon.

-blazed

DtJ Jungle · May 14, 2009

I'm fairly conservative too. I just haven't had time to think out a real argument for a debate

/school johns

adumbrodeus · May 14, 2009

Aesir said:
We need more moderates/conservatives in this board.

Way to many libertarians/progressives/liberals.

Yay, only active debate hall moderate!

Seriously, we need a few more moderates here.

aeghrur · May 14, 2009

Moderates are boring.
Let's get some reactionaries in here.

Zero Beat · May 15, 2009

What do you guys think of the debate going on between Teran and Ny?

I like them both.

RDK · May 15, 2009

Zero Beat said:
What do you guys think of the debate going on between Teran and Ny?

I like them both.

Which thread is it? Link me.

Faithkeeper · May 15, 2009

RDK said:
Which thread is it? Link me.

I believe he refers to the debate in the "public schools" thread.

And the stuff looks good.

Aesir · May 16, 2009

Vorguen said:
I mean in the official Debate Hall.

It's hard to keep up with so many anarchy-seeking-terror-loving-neck-snapping-rage-inducing lefties in this room.

We need more conservative.

*Praises Allah*

Lol rage inducing lefties.

I think I'm really the only one here who's on the "far" left lol. I'd say most here are centered to leaning slightly left.

I miss Kur. =(

and Blazed: your reply to me was kind of pointless, I didn't ask why we didn't have more conservatives/moderates. I said we need more of them, or rather more active ones.

Maniclysane · May 18, 2009

Aesir said:
Lol rage inducing lefties.

I think I'm really the only one here who's on the "far" left lol. I'd say most here are centered to leaning slightly left.

I miss Kur. =(

and Blazed: your reply to me was kind of pointless, I didn't ask why we didn't have more conservatives/moderates. I said we need more of them, or rather more active ones.

I'm pretty sure most of us are lefties. You're not the only one on the far left though. I'm pretty sure Socialism is pretty far left.

aeghrur · May 18, 2009

Maniclysane said:
I'm pretty sure most of us are lefties. You're not the only one on the far left though. I'm pretty sure Socialism is pretty far left.

I didn't know you were socialist, lol.
I'm pretty left, but just like a regular liberal.

Support demand side economics and more social freedoms.

Faithkeeper · May 19, 2009

I officially (re?) nominate Vickey for the debate hall. She really should have gotten in with KrazyGlue and me IMO.

RDK · May 19, 2009

I second that. I also nominate Nysyarc, S.O.L.I.D., and also Crynts just for the hell of it.

Deleted member · May 20, 2009

Blazed, I'm Conservative in the Canadian sense. American Conservative is a little different. Actually, a lot different.

I want health care to be universal, for example. In fact, I'd love to see university tuition be socialized as well. There's only a few things I'm uneasy about: denouncing faith (which means I have to argue against 99.99% of the Debate Hall; abortion (I'm pro-choice, albeit reluctantly) ; gay marriage (it should be arbitrarily called a union).

blazedaces · May 20, 2009

DeLoRtEd1 said:
Blazed, I'm Conservative in the Canadian sense. American Conservative is a little different. Actually, a lot different.

I want health care to be universal, for example. In fact, I'd love to see university tuition be socialized as well. There's only a few things I'm uneasy about: denouncing faith (which means I have to argue against 99.99% of the Debate Hall; abortion (I'm pro-choice, albeit reluctantly) ; gay marriage (it should be arbitrarily called a union).

Alright. Sorry, didn't mean to single you out or say something about you that wasn't true.

My bad.

-blazed

Aesir · May 20, 2009

DeLoRtEd1 said:
Blazed, I'm Conservative in the Canadian sense. American Conservative is a little different. Actually, a lot different.

I want health care to be universal, for example. In fact, I'd love to see university tuition be socialized as well. There's only a few things I'm uneasy about: denouncing faith (which means I have to argue against 99.99% of the Debate Hall; abortion (I'm pro-choice, albeit reluctantly) ; gay marriage (it should be arbitrarily called a union).

So wait the Conservative party Canada is like the Lincoln republican? get out.

adumbrodeus · May 20, 2009

aeghrur said:
Moderates are boring.
Let's get some reactionaries in here.

Wait, I'm boring? Me? Really?

Zero Beat said:
What do you guys think of the debate going on between Teran and Ny?

I like them both.

I want them in.

Teran's especially interesting because his devil's advocate times are difficult to pick out and he's pretty good them.

aeghrur · May 20, 2009

adumbrodeus said:
Wait, I'm boring? Me? Really?

Doesn't mean your not intelligent.

But it's much more explosive to have like Stalin v. Hitler than say, obama v. mccain.

Deleted member · May 20, 2009

blazedaces said:
Alright. Sorry, didn't mean to single you out or say something about you that wasn't true.

My bad.

-blazed

No no no not at all, I wasn't offended, lol. Saying I'm Conservative isn't an insult. I just thought I'd clarify because the word has different meanings depending on your location.

Maniclysane · May 20, 2009

Am I the only one who's noticed that the topics in the Proving Ground are all not really debate worthy? It seems like the good topics are started by the people in the debate hall. The problem is the good debaters get plucked out and they're left with a lot of dead topics. I think the Proving grounds could use a little work.

And we have too many debate hall members in the Temp Debate hall.

blazedaces · May 20, 2009

DeLoRtEd1 said:
No no no not at all, I wasn't offended, lol. Saying I'm Conservative isn't an insult. I just thought I'd clarify because the word has different meanings depending on your location.

Gotchya. Then all is well.

So what's the updated news on this event? I feel like there have been enough nominations to tally up the votes and have it?

edit:

Maniclysane said:
Am I the only one who's noticed that the topics in the Proving Ground are all not really debate worthy? It seems like the good topics are started by the people in the debate hall. The problem is the good debaters get plucked out and they're left with a lot of dead topics. I think the Proving grounds could use a little work.

And we have too many debate hall members in the Temp Debate hall.

Well, I agree that is true about the Proving Grounds, but isn't that its purpose after all? To weed out the good debaters?

-blazed

RDK · May 20, 2009

I think they need to let more people in at once.

And also, I should be the only PG mod.

Aesir · May 20, 2009

Are we allowed to make threads? or would you advise against that?

The reason I ask this is because after thinking about it I really derailed the ID thread. But in general if a thread derails and the topic diverts into something different, couldn't we just make a new thread and tell them to post their opinions there?

aeghrur · May 20, 2009

Why would you make a new thread?
I personally dislike this ideal of debate threads being so... linear.
Allow for tangents, let the thread derail, see what comes of it. If it starts off a new topic which is a deeper continuation of the original, I would say by all means allow it. It only shows that the debaters have started to see the thing behind things, which is a good thing.
And again, I have stated before that tangents, with a center point of course, allows for people to learn a new type of thinking. People already know how to think linearly, not everyone knows how to think tangentially. If we start packaging threads, making new ones every time people go on a tangent, and starting a new topic every time we go deeper, are people really going to learn anything?

RDK · May 20, 2009

I think it depends on how relevant the tangent is to the actual topic.

Everyone who was here far back enough to remember the Yossarian tangents knows that they can be fun, but they also can detract from the actual discussion. So IMO they should be allowed to an extent, but if you jump from talking about economic policy to whether or not the sky is blue, I think it's been taken too far.

But it may just be that some of the topics being made are too broad.

Zero Beat · May 20, 2009

Good points. How about you guys analyze these links for example? Because I thought this mini debate on tangents of the Philosophical Cop Out thread was beautifully done.

When I debate someone, I want to see their point, even if we have to derail the thread. Otherwise, what IS the point? It was between adumbrodeus and me:

READ!
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7123623&postcount=86

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7123874&postcount=87

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7123993&postcount=88

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7124174&postcount=89

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=7124291&postcount=90
What do you people think? Did this deserve its own thread? What would you title it?

RDK · May 20, 2009

I think it's hard to draw a line without being arbitrary. Towards the end of that little exchange it kind of entered a new territory.

I think if somebody made a new thread that deals with "scientific commentary on ethics, beauty, etc." it would be fun to pursue the topic further. But the OP was about agnosticism, so....

~ Gheb ~ · May 26, 2009

Maniclysane said:
Am I the only one who's noticed that the topics in the Proving Ground are all not really debate worthy?

You're not.

Many of the topics in the Proving Ground aren't debate worthy. I assume that most of them are just forced discussions: They need some discussions to recommend themselves for the Debate Hall, which means that the discussion itself is actually more important than it's content.

It seems like the good topics are started by the people in the debate hall. The problem is the good debaters get plucked out and they're left with a lot of dead topics. I think the Proving grounds could use a little work.

Well ... that's the nature of the Proving Grounds. With so many inexperienced debaters you shouldn't expect many lively topics either - just as you said yourself: few topics are actually worth being discussed. And since the good debaters are plugged out (which is the purpose of the PG after all) there's not much left in the PG to seriously discuss.

Is that a problem? I think not.

And we have too many debate hall members in the Temp Debate hall.

On the contrary.

I think every DH memmber should have the right to post in the PG (although it should in my opinion be recommended not to post much in the PG if you're already a DH member). The reason I'm saying this is that a DH member is probably more capable of starting a worthy discussion than somebody, who just starts discussions in order to get into the DH (rather than discussing something worthy). He can also fulfil several roles to spark further discussions by stating controversial opinions or to be a role models and "guide new" debaters in case it is needed.

A good example would be Crimson King's "F*** the police?" topic. Unlike discussions created by regular members it refers to an actual incident as its basis to back up his main point (which is also noteworthy - it does actually have a point). As a result the topic lasted longer than the average discussion (3 pages vs usually 1 page of a random discussion). It's certainly no coincidence that the topic with one of the highest reply counts was actually created by a DH member ("Teaching Intelligent Design..." by EOR).

So why should we decrease the number of DH members in the PG when it's rather evident that the presence of a DH member is benifitial in the PG?

Deleted member · May 26, 2009

It's evident? Faithkeeper made a pretty good case for reducing the amount of Debate Hall -> Proving Grounds posts.

Aesir · May 26, 2009

Even though I don't really practice what I preach I honestly think we should only post if discussion has stagnated for an arbitrary amount of time.

Which I decided is what I'm gonna do for now on lol.

Debater Nomination Topic

Cognitive Scientist

Smash Hero

Life is just a party

Smash Hero

Check out my character in #GranblueFantasy

Smash Lord

Smash Master

Smash Lord

Smash Champion

Smash Lord

Smash Champion

Smash Lord

Check out my character in #GranblueFantasy

Smash Legend

Smash Champion

Cognitive Scientist

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Master

Smash Lord

Smash Champion

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Deleted member

Guest

Smash Lord

Smash Master

Smash Legend

Smash Champion

Deleted member

Guest

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Master

Smash Champion

Smash Hero

Cognitive Scientist

Smash Hero

Life is just a party

Deleted member

Guest

Smash Master

Information

Network