(((DEBATES!)))

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 7:45 pm

I had this idea last night. Topics for debate can be suggested... we'd have to think of some, something pretty subjective that we don't have very fixed views on... like, I was thinking: "Anger is a useless emotion", or something like that. Then, two posters can nominate themselves for 'For' or 'Against' (openly or privately?), then submit their entries privately to someone (I can do this, but it doesn't have to be me) who posts them, and then everyone can vote via the poll on the points made and overall persuasiveness. A not strict limit of 30 or 40 lines can be set, with posters risking losing votes for not being succint.

So, anybody got any other suggestions for:

1. Topics for debate?
2. How any of it might be done?

ice nine · Post by **ice nine** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 2:54 am

It's funny how people in different continents can have similar ideas. I guess it just goes to show that people are similar regardless of their culture. I had this idea: A person could write a essay on one particular topic and others could comment on his/her essay. I was thinking a good essay could be 'The State of Music Today and How It Effects Culture' In the essay we could discussed the popularity of Madonna, Britney, Christina, rap music, etc.

I've had a bit to drink tonight so I will probably read this tomorrow and think, 'What was I thinking?'

laughingcrow · Post by **laughingcrow** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:46 am

GM Crops

The death penalty

Gene manipulation in unborn children

Britain in the EU, yes or no?

Mick Hucknell and Rod Stewart...is it their money?

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:58 am

I say we don't have any debates, ha ha!!

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:59 am

Good, good... keep em coming...

Another possibility is to have a proposition like: "Why appearances count", and then whoever is up for submitting a case for it can notify me, and then I can give the go ahead for them to do so, again by pm by a given time. Then I post them all at once and we can compare...

I don't know, let's discuss it...

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:01 am

I say we don't discuss it!!

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:02 am

Why not? Wanna debate it? Or do you want to step outside right now, wise guy?

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:16 am

Yeah, you and who's army dude. Just kidding.

As a subject how about "Kinder Murder - Is it about rape or a racehorse?"

Seriously (shorly not) how about

"Message Boards = dirty houses"
"George Bush is an alien"
"Smoking is good for you"
"All call centres are shite"
"My penis is the size of a submarine"
"All bishops are gay"
"R.E.M. vs 'Dead"
"The Larch is far superior tree to the Horsechestnut"
"Michael Schumacher, is he real?"
"Leader of the Pack was the greatest song of the seventies"

miss buenos aires · Post by **miss buenos aires** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 9:25 am

"All love is unrequited."

laughingcrow · Post by **laughingcrow** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 10:57 am

Horses, good or bad?

If a tree falls in the woods and there's noone there, who cares?

How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if he had the option to throw perspex spheres filled with helium?

Is Satan really an elf that Father Christmas fired for shoddy workmanship and who now seeks red retribution?

Is Donald duck naked from the waist down?

pip_52 · Post by **pip_52** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:30 am

Is all "art" art?

What matters more in art, the artists intention or other people's perspectives?

taz · Post by **taz** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:41 am

Is that Tom Waits in Bamboo's avatar?

cosmos · Post by **cosmos** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:41 am

"Art is short for Arthur" - Keith Richards

pip_52 · Post by **pip_52** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:47 am

Led Zeppelin Vs. The Who!

Yeah, I think I am in love with Bamboo's avatar . . .

Just slightly off topic . . .

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 3:35 pm

Is that Tom Waits in Bamboo's avatar?

Can i argue the 'For' on this debate?

firebetty · Post by **firebetty** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:21 pm

is being provocative exclusively a natural act?
that is, if you are trying to be provocative, are you automatically disqualified?

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:26 pm

Fucking provocative, who's being fucking provocative??

firebetty · Post by **firebetty** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:46 pm

i am not sure who.
it was a therotetical debate topic, or maybe just a cry for something saucy from the bored. (the bored would be me)

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:01 pm

Sorry, I was just misquoting a Derek and Clive (Pete n Dud) skit.

By the way I am willing to participate in any of the debates and to give an argument in support of anything, even if I don't believe it!! I would however find it very very hard to argue against me having a peni..............

ice nine · Post by **ice nine** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 11:58 am

As Emily Latala use to say after being chastized by Jane Curtin: 'Nevermind'

so lacklustre · Post by **so lacklustre** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 7:55 am

Bamboo where have you gone? I'm waiting for round 1.

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Thu Nov 06, 2003 8:18 am

Alright... sorry I didn't get back earlier, but I've not had much time.

I had started to think that there could be debates as well as non-debates - that, in non-debates (as in debates), it could be interesting to have people submit original thoughts independently, and see what comes up... you could say things you might not normally say in a normal thread. BUT, would there be much incentive for posters to do that? Probably not... So I thought, "let's stick to debates".

Here's THE PLAN.

A few initial points:

A debate could go ahead with as little as one person on each side, but at this initial stage I'd like to encourage having two or more people on each side for each debate (each submission independent of any other). The more the better... more inclusive, and different types of submissions (varying in size, scope, seriousness...).

I'd like it to be a fun situation without pressure. You don't have to knock yourself out, and I won't enforce a deadline. Remember, the topics will be deliberately subjective... if you wanted to you could argue convincing points for either side... there's no right or wrong. That would be part of the challenge, trying to pre-empt counter arguments. Just because you take one side, it doesn't mean that that's your fixed personal position. It's all in fun, just have a go.

With regards to the topics I'll nominate, your position might be "I'll have a go if there's enough other people". If so, you are an 'IF'. PM me and tell me which debate you are interested in, and which position you might contribute to - FOR or AGAINST. This PM method is just to keep who the the participants are a surprise, but I'll let everyone know how many IFs (or confirmed participants) there are on each side for each debate, while encouraging more. But always indicate your intention by PMing me; don't announce it to everyone.

Remember, it doesn't have to be super serious - no need to go and do research for your entry or anything, just post more or less whatever comes to mind.

OK, so this is how it will (hopefully) go:

1. I nominate 2 or 3 topics for debate at a time. 'IF's pm me stating what position in which debate they might contribute to, and in a few days I let everyone know how many IFs there are so far for what (and therefore also how many more are desired for what).

2. Once there are enough IFs or confirmed debaters for a debate (2 or more on each side, but hopefully more than that), I pm them back and give the OK to submit their entry. There'll be no deadlines at this point.

3. When all contributions for a debate are in, I post them all at once on a poll thread. There will eventually be an individual winner, but all votes will obviously be added up at the end to determine the winning side... you might just prefer to be on the winning side. Or, you might want the biggest slice of THE GLORY!

4. Each poster in the debate is then allowed ONE MORE POST to respond to any points brought up, before anyone else is allowed to post on the thead. Debaters may decline this opportunity of course, but would have to say so.

5. Then, other people can post on the thread. At this point - also at any other time - out of respect for everyone else, I'd just request that we not be frivolous or go wildly off topic (not to say we shouldn't have humour... but just don't be a putz).

Righto, I've had a think about the suggested topics so far. The ones nominated for the initial debates are:

Who should decide what is "art", the "artist" or the audience? (For = the artist, Against= the audience)

Genetically modified crops are important. For or Against

"All love is unrequited" For or Against.

I've changed the first two a bit. Other suggestions by Firebetty and LaughingCrow would still be under consideration for the next debates (if this all goes ok, that is). But I think some could be defined a bit better, and so might the ones I brought up, but we'll think about all that later. Icenine, don't give up so easily mate. Pip and Taz, yeah, that's Tom Waits, from around Rain Dogs I think. Btw, just because you suggest a topic, it doesn't mean you can't be in that debate (except for me).

In the meantime, more suggestions for topics (or of any other kind) are welcome, and I'll eagerly await PMs from all you IFs out there over the next few days.

LET'S GO! (.......

)

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 10:48 am

^

^

Don't forget. Keep those PMs coming.

PlaythingOrPet · Post by **PlaythingOrPet** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 10:52 am

It all seems so....confusing.

bambooneedle · Post by **bambooneedle** » Fri Nov 07, 2003 10:57 am

Dear PoP, what do you mean? I'm here to help...

It's not that the topics are too hard, is it?