ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.WEPR question

17 1983
Skyla
offline
Skyla
300 posts
750

Didn't know where else to post this so..

What happened to Moegreche's "The Great Debate"?

Basically any info about why the debates stopped and whether or not they're going to make a comeback.

I thought they were a fun and challenging way to earn merits, not to mention educational.

  • 17 Replies
BRAAINZz
offline
BRAAINZz
797 posts
105

What happened to Moegreche's "The Great Debate"?


It generally disappeared like Moegreche did. I haven't seen him in a long time, although I saw him post once a week ago, he may be lurking if he is at all active.

Also, the Mods probably don't want to oversee this at the current time with about four active mods. With the little manpower they have, they don't have the time to give merits when they are more needed eliminating spam from the site.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,237 posts
1,245

Didn't know where else to post this so..

What happened to Moegreche's "The Great Debate"?

Basically any info about why the debates stopped and whether or not they're going to make a comeback.

I thought they were a fun and challenging way to earn merits, not to mention educational.


http://i49.tinypic.com/2vjbgba.gif

Sorry I really couldn't help myself. Other than you and me, I don't think anyone else here remembers said event. That was so long ago.

Moe pops in and posts a few times every few months.
Devoidless
offline
Devoidless
3,837 posts
3,210

What, you trying to say I forgot all about those? How dare you, good sir!

Even before Moe resigned, the debates were slowly dieing down. Mainly because the most interested, involved and skilled members gradually drifted away from the forums.

Moegreche
online
Moegreche
3,411 posts
15,585

Devoidless is right - those debates just sort of winded themselves down. And BRAAINZz is also right - I do still tend to lurk the forums.

As it stands right now, my time is very limited (and hopefully, it continues to be that way). If anyone is interested in starting the debates back up, then I'm confident the current moderators would support this in whatever ways they can. But even if it end up being a 'rogue thread' it would still be really fun for those involved. I enjoyed overseeing the debates, but real life has a tendency to get in the way of most online things.

Xzeno
offline
Xzeno
2,349 posts
130

I thought they were a fun and challenging way to earn merits, not to mention educational.
That's true. Assuming you mean "biased, insular and close-minded" instead of "fun and challenging".

While this type of forum of course exists for different ways of thinking to clash, giving one faction power over another hinders this goal. A system such as The Great Debate, no matter how unbiased the intention, creates an intellectual aristocracy while suppressing contrary ideas. No "objective" rules or petty devotion to rationalism can save us from human error.

What? I miss the good ol' days too. But someone has to be negative.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,237 posts
1,245

I stand corrected.

Anyway, if anyone has any ideas on how to get this ball rolling again, feel free to discuss it here.

nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,474 posts
21,890

People would have to play DA for quite a few topics if this ever came back....

Kyouzou
offline
Kyouzou
5,169 posts
3,265

Yes, our forum does seem to lack the diverse viewpoints it was brimming with a few years ago. I wouldn't mind playing devil's advocate depending on the situation, it's usually very easy to see the two sides of a situation, although there are some people and situations who/which it's absolutely infuriating to argue with/about, which tends to ruin the fun of a debate.

nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,474 posts
21,890

That's why we need someone to moderate any official debate....

sensanaty
offline
sensanaty
1,145 posts
140

Wow, people still remember that?

Yes, well, you guys have fun remaking that thread, considering the userbase of the forums these days is nothing in comparison to what it used to be when Moe made it.

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,332 posts
3,715

it sounds so mysterious.
maybe a idea for those that do not remember it like myself. to explain what this is all about.

Kyouzou
offline
Kyouzou
5,169 posts
3,265

Hey now, you never know until you try. I don't think I ever actually took part in one of the debates, although I do remember reading quite a few of them.

Skyla
offline
Skyla
300 posts
750

People would have to play DA for quite a few topics if this ever came back....


It's sometimes fun to play DA, as Kyouzou pointed out.

While this type of forum of course exists for different ways of thinking to clash, giving one faction power over another hinders this goal. A system such as The Great Debate, no matter how unbiased the intention, creates an intellectual aristocracy while suppressing contrary ideas. No "objective" rules or petty devotion to rationalism can save us from human error.


O.o

Not sure what you're getting at. Debates create an intellectual aristocracy? Extrapolate please >.>


Yes, well, you guys have fun remaking that thread, considering the userbase of the forums these days is nothing in comparison to what it used to be when Moe made it.


The Great Debate would be nice to have, even if activity is low. I think it work better with a smaller userbase, considering the mod userbase is low too.

The ideal situation would be to have a consistent, but slow-paced flow of debates - say 2-4 per day. This way, the judges aren't overwhelmed and the users get to test their skills. (:
----

I can remember a number of issues that were hindering the quality of debates. Here's a list of a few off the top of my head, with possible solutions:

Problem: The sense of competition, especially on forums such as this, tend to attract the Dunning-Kruger effect types.

Solution
: Certain qualifications for entering a debate, e.g. 3+ merits (this would help limit and control the amount of debates, as well).

Problem: ArmorGames is a close-knit community, sort of. With a single judge overseeing debates, the results could favor a friend, despite conscious efforts to be neutral and impartial.

This could be countered by having two or more judges per debate, but I don't see that happening with the limited number of active moderators.
StDrake
offline
StDrake
199 posts
16,470

Seeing how uncommon merits are these days your solution just did what the accusation you quoted mentionned - only a select few "elites" would be admitted, the few that, due to a "little bit of great effort" and a huge lot of luck for it to be noticed and noted, have any merits at all.
Perhaps at first we should debate on how to debate properly again?

Xzeno
offline
Xzeno
2,349 posts
130

Hmm. I see where my post could have been unclear. I don't mean debates will create aristocracy. I mean formal debates with explicit winners and losers will create aristocracy. I mean to suggest that, whether consciously or unconsciously, moderators of these debates will seek to promote some ideas while repressing others.

The issue is that the control of the debate would most likely be placed in the hands of a group of people who hold similar ideas. For example: I respect Moe and think he's incredibly thoughtful. Everyone should look to him when they want to know how to debate or just how to think. I also think he's a tool who refuses to seriously consider radically different points of view after he's made up his mind. Which is okay.

So anyway, because I think it's important to pretend to be constructive, I few suggestions:

-Make debates more public. Carry them out on a forum thread, not comments. This will allow users to watch and discuss debates (consider a separate discussion thread).
-Maybe remove winners and losers. This would do a lot to help the "moderators will push their political agendas whether they mean to or not" problem.

As for the merit limit, I don't think that's going to work. For example, I only have the two, and while I should have one for my review of Barbarian Onslaught, I shouldn't have one for my review of some music game, so I call it even. My merit for Epic War... 3? was on the money, though. So anyway, I'm, you know, smart, and excluding me from debates on the basis of merits would be silly.

I'd never deign to join such a debate anyway, not because I think I'm better than anyone, it's just the kind of person I am, but it's an example.

This could be countered by having two or more judges per debate
No it couldn't. It might help address one person's biases, but it does nothing to address the overarching problem, which is that the community of people in charge would develop a culture embracing some ideas while rejecting others.
Showing 1-15 of 17