Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't have much experience with this, but I do remember back in high school that there were rules for debates . . . "debating," is a formal contest with certain rules - first one person goes, then the other one, then rebuttal, then the other rebuttal, then conclusion and there are points scored for each round and a winner is proclaimed.
As I was reading through some of the threads, I would read a thread where the argument was laid out very logically and then others would pipe up with absolutely absurd (illogical) arguments . . .
It made me wonder why someone does not "score" the thread after a certain amount of responses - and a winner be declared . . .either the OP or a respondent.
Debating is predicated on the understanding of logic so it would seem fairly obvious which arguments are logical and which are not (it wouldn't be purely subjective).
A team of people could decide.
I would like to see this because I think it could further understanding of issues because "winner" arguments would be given credence and there would be a penalty (at least socially) for putting forth ridiculous or unsubstantiated premises or arguments).
The process you describe would create work for the moderators. Great Debates only has 1 assigned mod. I remember a stretch of a few months while I was moderating last year where GD had no assigned mods and plenty of reported posts.
It's probably not feasible to add structure there without more mods.
Its really not that formal and always struck me as a place to discuss things on a more mature level without the politics and controversy crowd clogging up the conversation with political madness/insanity.
I'm sure a Google search would bring up much more serious debating forums where the rules you seek are in play....
It's an idea, but It would be to much work. Great Debates just deals with topics that are constantly an issue and cause much debate. It's not really aiming to be a contest anyway.
Its really not that formal and always struck me as a place to discuss things on a more mature level without the politics and controversy crowd clogging up the conversation with political madness/insanity.
I'm sure a Google search would bring up much more serious debating forums where the rules you seek are in play....
I am not really saying to follow absolutely formal rules, because I think that would be too logistically difficult to manage. But I am suggesting to have the "spirit of debate" present in making determinations if arguments are "logical" or "illogical."
It just struck me that some people are presenting logical arguments and others are responding with madness - and it would be nice to have a third party at least comment on the process in a "Great Debate" format.
If admin wanted a section like that and they got a strict moderator or two to oversee it it could work,one problem would be in getting a group of volunteers to be judges on such a section where 20 debates at once could be going on and with no clearly defined debaters how would you even know when a debate was over.Sounds like one major headache for a somewhat general content forum such as this one..
If admin wanted a section like that and they got a strict moderator or two to oversee it it could work,one problem would be in getting a group of volunteers to be judges on such a section where 20 debates at once could be going on and with no clearly defined debaters how would you even know when a debate was over.Sounds like one major headache for a somewhat general content forum such as this one..
That's why I suggested that after a certain period of time, a moderator could just pop in and comment on who seems to be "winning" or comment if an argument is logical or illogical . . . that's the part that would be interesting.
I am sure there is such a way to format it so it would not be too overwhelming - like a comment after 10 or 15 or 20 posts . . .
Otherwise, it's not really "debating," per se - just random scuffles.
I'm not sure your idea is even possible on an open forum such as this one where you could get a hundred or more participants in a popular topic...
Maybe theres something out there that would more meet your requirements.. https://www.google.ca/#hl=en&sugexp=...iw=831&bih=488
A moderator could comment after so many responses - could give a synopsis of the current status of the "debate." Something like . . . "The OP opened with the argument that 'thus and so' - which was presented very logically - then 'x' commented that (whatever) a seemingly emotional response without logical merit, then 'y' asserted (such and so) . . .It appears at this point the OP has made a good case for (whatever) and has subsequently supported her arguments . . . the debate at this moment is in favor of the OP."
A moderator could comment after so many responses - could give a synopsis of the current status of the "debate." Something like . . . "The OP opened with the argument that 'thus and so' - which was presented very logically - then 'x' commented that (whatever) a seemingly emotional response without logical merit, then 'y' asserted (such and so) . . .It appears at this point the OP has made a good case for (whatever) and has subsequently supported her arguments . . . the debate at this moment is in favor of the OP."
That would require one (or more) dedicated moderators who would be "on duty" in the forum 24/7, as there's no other way to know that "x number" of responses have been made and that it's time to interrupt the discussion for a recap.
That's simply not going to happen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.