Ok following on from some conversation in the thread relating to the US Embassy attacks, I thought it might be an idea to create a specific thread of debate. Would anyone like to suggest a motion which we can adopt and discuss? There have been a lot of topics splintered of from main threads which we have had to delay to avoid going completly off topic. Is anyone interested in debating ? A rough format would be. A motion is presented- Those who are for the motion or against indicate so. A period of a day or 2 is allowed for research on the motion. Understanding that those who would like to take part in it have some prior knowledge as we seem to have quite an intellectual bunch ^_^ Those for present an opening statement, those against present an opening statement -not a rebuttle- Then we just kind of go from there. Some possible motions. Britain would of been better staying out of world war two. Religion is bad for the human race Abortion is morally wrong Gun control is good for society State involvement in our life's is to high and should be kept at a minimum. The events of WW2 mainly the holocaust have been exaggerated by the victors. These are just ones that came to mind, as I was thought typing. Raz
These sound interesting Religion is bad for the human race Abortion is morally wrong Gun control is good for society State involvement in our life's is to high and should be kept at a minimum. I'm game, but a two day time limit seems a little steep. Why not let it flow, see where it goes? I can see this being quite fiery or people taking a quick look and saying "hell no I ain't touching that subject". Some things I would be interested in discussing, but not just for discussion's sake. If it's a decent debate with two sides to the fence I'm in. But something like, staying out of ww2, not so much.
Yea I get ya' I meant for people to kind of state what side of the fence they were on before starting the debate, to avoid random interjections which require people debating to re state a lot of their positions for the sake of the person who has come along half way through. 2 days was a random number really Raz
If its a discussion/debate and not the "you're stupid, I'm right" kind of thing that sometimes happens I can see this being quite interesting to watch from the cheap seats.
Yea thats why I was advocating a structure, it stops people coming in making a snide remark and running away. Looks to the mods for a moderator Raz
Sounds good, want to get things started? Pick 6 topics, roll the dice go with the flow? Gotcha, so state what your position is and why at the start, argue your case, come back with evidence etc (please don;t make this links and tons of youtube videos and pasted stuff, that would just make it tedious). Then state where you are after it is all done? Sounds good. How about mods volunteering to referee?
Allow a bit of time for more people to see it I think would be prudent, and for a mod to be a moderator ^_^ Raz
I don't know that you need a Moderator to sit and watch this, though I feel plenty will be doing exactly that, as its kind of what they do. What is it exactly that you'd have them do? Call foul for off-topic, or tantrumy posts? You can assign or elect someone to do that. It doesnt have to be an actual mod. Just find someone neutral to the topic.
So the first debate, is basically what to debate, how to debate it and how to referee it? I'll referee this one, I'm on the fence.
Haha, I think allowing some time for some more people to see and suggest some topics Yea if someone makes a BS post, or is being overly semantic, they can reign them in. Your right would not have to be a mod in the sense of a mod, just a mod. :woo:
We should have a team of three impartial blokes to act as football referees and make bogus calls, confer with each other a lot and basically do nothing of any value whatsoever.
No, we should have one head referee, an assistant and some linesmen. On a serious note 1-3 refs sounds good. State before a debate, for example abortion, you're on the fence or can keep on the fence about it, or have two diff sides try to be impartial, and keep the debate on track. Elect referees before, then state what side you are on before it starts, go at it. Or, just keep things simple, go at it, keep it on topic, and everyone kinda chips in and referees in a nice way if it gets too off topic?
I think having a volunteer mod sounds good. Someone whoes interested in the topic but is content with being fair. Yes deffo stating were you stand before hand by means of an "opening" statement, if that makes sense. Raz
