PDA

View Full Version : Moderated Debates?



Absinthe Anecdote
08-23-2013, 07:26 PM
Last week I jokingly posted a comment about having a moderated monthly debate but the idea stuck in my head and I am wondering if there is enough interest to see if it’s feasible.

A rough idea would be to have polls for debate topics then solicit volunteer participants for each side of the question.

Would it be possible to have a thread that was password protected to allow only that month’s participants have access?

We could have an open sub-thread for the other forum members to comment into.

We could figure out a set number of posts for each side to present their cases and then have a poll to determine the winner.

I’m sure there are plenty of debate rules and procedures out there on the internet that could be used as a model for our particular style of debate.

I realize that this would take some effort on the part of the moderators and it might prove too much to pull off on a monthly basis, perhaps quarterly?

I don’t know if this would flop or not but it might be fun to try.

I thought I would toss this idea out as serious question for the mods and others to consider.

UncaRastus
08-23-2013, 09:07 PM
AbsintheAnecdote,

I will pass this on to others. I like the your ideas, and I do think that is worth looking at. Be patient!

Rizzo77
08-23-2013, 09:20 PM
Don't forget rule #1 for internet debates: The debate ends when a Nazi analogy is made, with the writer who made the analogy being considered to have lost the argument.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-23-2013, 09:22 PM
I don't get it.

If I'm interested in a debate, I want to join in not just read two random posters missing the point. :-)

The only way I think this would be interesting is if the debaters were guest experts in the topic from opposing viewpoints...you know, policymakers from the PT office, or uniform board, etc...but, anyone in an official position would have to be supporting the official message, so not much debate would be happening.

but, to have two of our regular members debating on a topic with everyone else locked out to only commenting on a side thread...I don't get it.

It would be a structured and limited exchange with the goal of winning support for your argument.

You'd have to bring your "A game" and support your position with facts to win.

Different than our normal free for all, locking other posters out of the debate prevents it from going off on a tangent.

TJMAC77SP
08-23-2013, 11:28 PM
I don't get it.

If I'm interested in a debate, I want to join in not just read two random posters missing the point. :-)

The only way I think this would be interesting is if the debaters were guest experts in the topic from opposing viewpoints...you know, policymakers from the PT office, or uniform board, etc...but, anyone in an official position would have to be supporting the official message, so not much debate would be happening.

but, to have two of our regular members debating on a topic with everyone else locked out to only commenting on a side thread...I don't get it.

I don't agree with that.......let's debate

TJMAC77SP
08-23-2013, 11:28 PM
Don't forget rule #1 for internet debates: The debate ends when a Nazi analogy is made, with the writer who made the analogy being considered to have lost the argument.

Well, true. The alternative is when some homoerotic taunt is thrown.

Vrake
08-24-2013, 12:15 AM
I don't agree with that.......let's debate


Well, true. The alternative is when some homoerotic taunt is thrown.


I will play!! What are you wearing? :)

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 12:24 AM
I will play!! What are you wearing? :)

It has to be offensive not humorous, homoerotic humorous dialogue is better at taking conversations off topic in my experience. I had this down to a science for quite a while.

efmbman
08-24-2013, 12:41 AM
What are you..? Some kind of Nazi or somethin'?

Vrake
08-24-2013, 01:09 AM
It has to be offensive not humorous, homoerotic humorous dialogue is better at taking conversations off topic in my experience. I had this down to a science for quite a while.

Dang I had my nipple tassels and banana hammock on waiting for your response.

I got nothing I'm out...

Rizzo77
08-24-2013, 01:16 AM
What are you..? Some kind of Nazi or somethin'?

No, I like dudes (my name is Jeff). Homophobed yet?

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 01:48 AM
Dang I had my nipple tassels and banana hammock on waiting for your response.

I got nothing I'm out...

Kinky... Something tells me I'm going to need more beer!

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 01:54 AM
Crap, Pattaya Beach flashbacks abound, everything is so ambiguous! I'm so confused!!

Vrake
08-24-2013, 02:04 AM
Kinky... Something tells me I'm going to need more beer!

LOL.

My favorite way to answer a phone is "what are you wearing?" Even at work when it is supposed to be professional. Biggest thing is know your audience. I have had many an officer call me and after they identify themselves that's my next question. I get everything from a uncomfortable pause to "nothing but a flight suit" My standard answer when I am asked is above.

**edit... My wife has picked up on it as well, much fun can be had when I am on duty and the phone rings. She will grab it before I can and just answer it "what are you wearing?" Lucky our duty entails nothing serious and the phone rings maybe once a month.

RobotChicken
08-24-2013, 02:06 AM
:spy "'Joe B' vs 'Tak' ding DING!!"

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 02:10 AM
LOL.

My favorite way to answer a phone is "what are you wearing?" Even at work when it is supposed to be professional. Biggest thing is know your audience. I have had many an officer call me and after they identify themselves that's my next question. I get everything from a uncomfortable pause to "nothing but a flight suit" My standard answer when I am asked is above.

It's not gay until someone squirts KY all over the place with the tongue sticking out the side of his mouth while in @$$-less chaps

Vrake
08-24-2013, 02:28 AM
Oh crap I am way off the reservation, forgot what thread I was in. I don't know if I can get behind moderated debates. Two people would seem kind of boring and even if someone was to "win" what is the point? Much more fun to have a thread that wanders all over like this. An important/personnel thread always stays on topic due to the passion people feel about things IMHO.

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 02:33 AM
Oh crap I am way off the reservation, forgot what thread I was in. I don't know if I can get behind moderated debates. Two people would seem kind of boring and even if someone was to "win" what is the point? Much more fun to have a thread that wanders all over like this. An important/personnel thread always stays on topic due to the passion people feel about things IMHO.

I've always been of the impression, if you wish for a debate to remain between two individuals in the MTF, those two master debaters should utilize the Multi-quote functionality of the webpage, respond to every nuance of every phrase in a person's text with a retort, dismiss the general point of their argument entirely, only to have it returned in kind in the next post. Most of the other posters lack the attention spans necessary to intervene or interrupt!

Rizzo77
08-24-2013, 02:36 AM
I've always been of the impression, if you wish for a debate to remain between two individuals in the MTF, those two master debaters should utilize the Multi-quote functionality of the webpage, respond to every nuance of every phrase in a person's text with a retort, dismiss the general point of their argument entirely, only to have it returned in kind in the next post. Most of the other posters lack the attention spans necessary to intervene or interrupt!

Exactly! Any and all master debaters should be able to function without moderation.

Vrake
08-24-2013, 02:42 AM
I've always been of the impression, if you wish for a debate to remain between two individuals in the MTF, those two master debaters should utilize the Multi-quote functionality of the webpage, respond to every nuance of every phrase in a person's text with a retort, dismiss the general point of their argument entirely, only to have it returned in kind in the next post. Most of the other posters lack the attention spans necessary to intervene or interrupt!

Well then you are entirely wrong!! I interrupt your response to say everyone who posts here is out for what's best for their respective service and anyone with a different view might just roast kittens on the weekend.

:)

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 02:45 AM
Well then you are entirely wrong!! I interrupt your response to say everyone who posts here is out for what's best for their respective service and anyone with a different view might just roast kittens on the weekend.

:)

We all service the American people, I walk down the streets and they thank me for my service quite frequently!

Interceptor
08-24-2013, 02:55 AM
Last week I jokingly posted a comment about having a moderated monthly debate but the idea stuck in my head and I am wondering if there is enough interest to see if it’s feasible.

A rough idea would be to have polls for debate topics then solicit volunteer participants for each side of the question.

Would it be possible to have a thread that was password protected to allow only that month’s participants have access?

We could have an open sub-thread for the other forum members to comment into.

We could figure out a set number of posts for each side to present their cases and then have a poll to determine the winner.

I’m sure there are plenty of debate rules and procedures out there on the internet that could be used as a model for our particular style of debate.

I realize that this would take some effort on the part of the moderators and it might prove too much to pull off on a monthly basis, perhaps quarterly?

I don’t know if this would flop or not but it might be fun to try.

I thought I would toss this idea out as serious question for the mods and others to consider.

I've seen this concept work in other boards that I'm a member of and don't see why it couldn't work here. When it comes to moderation of these types of debates, moderation is usually non existent due to the fact that both parties agree to follow the rules of the debate and only if something really out of the debate rules happens will I mod step in. We can have one dedicated mod to oversee debates.

The topics can be suggested by all members and mods and members could PM the mod assigned to the debate forum and he can pick the debaters if their is more than one for each side of the debate. We can do tag team debates also. I can see this idea gain traction is enough members are in favor and can suggest ways to make it viable and to the satisfaction of the larger community of members.

Keep your ideas and comments flowing... We are listening...

TJMAC77SP
08-24-2013, 04:22 AM
It has to be offensive not humorous, homoerotic humorous dialogue is better at taking conversations off topic in my experience. I had this down to a science for quite a while.

Down....you want to go down on me ?!?!?!

(not the best but I usually don't play this game)

AJBIGJ
08-24-2013, 04:27 AM
Down....you want to go down on me ?!?!?!

(not the best but I usually don't play this game)

You can learn, I am an excellent teacher, or so I've been told! Just imagine the worst lines you could ever imagine yourself using on a chick, modify it for a dude, add two parts cyber stalker and one part Richard Simmons, then Execute!

Absinthe Anecdote
08-24-2013, 09:25 PM
I've seen this concept work in other boards that I'm a member of and don't see why it couldn't work here. When it comes to moderation of these types of debates, moderation is usually non existent due to the fact that both parties agree to follow the rules of the debate and only if something really out of the debate rules happens will I mod step in. We can have one dedicated mod to oversee debates.

The topics can be suggested by all members and mods and members could PM the mod assigned to the debate forum and he can pick the debaters if their is more than one for each side of the debate. We can do tag team debates also. I can see this idea gain traction is enough members are in favor and can suggest ways to make it viable and to the satisfaction of the larger community of members.

Keep your ideas and comments flowing... We are listening...

I like the tag team idea…

We would also have to decide the number of rounds the debate would last and a time limit between each round for the teams to submit their responses.

I think the most difficult aspect would be selecting interesting topics.

Either way it goes, thanks for considering this!

efmbman
08-24-2013, 10:29 PM
The time limit is a good idea, and adds a bit of challenge too considering the different timezones we could all be in.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-24-2013, 11:18 PM
The time limit is a good idea, and adds a bit of challenge too considering the different timezones we could all be in.

I guess it would need to be a generous time limit, huh?

efmbman
08-24-2013, 11:31 PM
I guess it would need to be a generous time limit, huh?

I would think so, yes. Don't ask for a suggestion! I have no idea what would be fair.

RobotChicken
08-25-2013, 07:00 AM
:spy "I vote for 'SGT HULK'!"

RS6405
08-25-2013, 05:18 PM
I've always been of the impression, if you wish for a debate to remain between two individuals in the MTF, those two master debaters should utilize the Multi-quote functionality of the webpage, respond to every nuance of every phrase in a person's text with a retort, dismiss the general point of their argument entirely, only to have it returned in kind in the next post. Most of the other posters lack the attention spans necessary to intervene or interrupt!

Hmmm that reminds me of someone... of course I am 2 days post the original comment, so someone may have said the same thing....

AJBIGJ
08-25-2013, 06:09 PM
Hmmm that reminds me of someone... of course I am 2 days post the original comment, so someone may have said the same thing....

I think you were the first probably to state it out loud (or at least in text). I would have said that I myself was guilty of it except for the fact that I can honestly state that I generally key in on a person's point in the full rather than thrashing their post into short sentences of text and nitpicking little errors for the purpose of distracting from the overall context of the person's argument.

Speaking of back and forth discussions, it would appear you came out on top for our first grand discussion about how DOMA would get repealed. I'll grant we both predicted the method accurately you did more so in also predicting which mechanism would win. That's what I get for debating a practicing lawyer when court stuff is involved. I'd hoped the legislature would get to it first, but it certainly lost that race!

John Drake
08-25-2013, 07:37 PM
Don't forget rule #1 for internet debates: The debate ends when a Nazi analogy is made, with the writer who made the analogy being considered to have lost the argument.

I disagree - in most cases it's a silly analogy, however, if the writer can make a strong case that there is a correlation between the topic and Nazism, what's wrong with saying it?

Pullinteeth
09-11-2013, 05:22 PM
:spy "'Joe B' vs 'Tak' ding DING!!"

You must have missed where they said that facts had to be used to support the argument...


Well then you are entirely wrong!! I interrupt your response to say everyone who posts here is out for what's best for their respective service and anyone with a different view might just roast kittens on the weekend.

:)

What do you have against Vietnamese veal?