Forums → WEPR → The Great Debate!
| 185 | 29477 |
I just wanted to start anew, and adjust a couple little details here and there on the rules and such! Nothing major.
There have been a lot of fantastic debates in this section of the forums, so I thought we could make things a bit more "interesting."
Here's how it works:
I will create profiles on which 2 people will debate one-on-one on a topic of their choosing. You will receive points based on 3 categories: argument strength, evidence, and refutation.
Argument strength is just that - how strong are your arguments. Logical fallacies and cogency of the argument play a strong role here (so, is the argument "correct" and does it make sense). Your spelling and grammar are important also, so either get a browser with spell-check or put your comments in Word or something that can check your spelling.
Evidence is articles or journals to which you can provide links to help support your argument. How reliable the evidence is also matters, so Wikipedia articles will not count towards evidence.
Refutation means being able to counter what your opponent is saying. If you can point out flaws in their argument or present counter-examples to their arguments then you can get points in this category.
The debate will go on until one debater reaches 10 points, or until one of the debaters fails to post within 48 hours without notice as to why. In that case, that debater will be considered to have forfeit. The winner will have his or her best argument point merited - thus receiving 25 AP!
----
So, if you want to join, just put your name, the topic you would like to debate about. Scoring will go to 10 points. Also include your stance on the topic.
Once you have this info posted, you have just given out a challenge and anyone can challenge you. If you would like to challenge someone, then post your name, their name, and the topic.
Feel free to create multiple challenges, so long as you can keep track of them all! Once two debaters have been matched, I'll post a link to the profile on which you guys will be debating.
I think that's everything, but here's an example of a challenge:
Name: Devoidless
Topic: Does God exist?
My stance: God does not exist!
If someone were to challenge me, then they would have to argue an opposing view to mine (in this case, that God does exist).
So, let the debates begin, and if anything is unclear or if I've missed anything then let me know either on this thread or on my profile.
Thanks, and happy debating!!
- 185 Replies
That sounds like an interesting debate, and tell me if somewhere opens for me and XCoheedX's debate I asked about ; )
^
|
@ Aids, This is a place to post a debate, or take on a debate. Maybe you should look around for a topic that you would like to debate. I maight even take you on.
~Strider~
I will happily challenge Estel to abortion. That sounds very awkward...
...under every condition.
Wow. That really is very awkward. I foresee a lot of bitten bullets.
As I have had my wicked way and ambushed the hapless Bigbowla by presenting my position as something it was not while maintaining complete consistency, I may, once my current debate is complete, reintroduce the same topic but now in unambiguous terms.
Moe and Estel:
http://armorgames.com/user/Debate_Society2
Have fun!
Ok, when are you going to be able to set up Mine and Coheeds, it's on the previous page???
But...but..there is already one about that going as as we speak. It should be wrapping up pretty soon though.
Yeah, there's no game to play now that the trap has clearly been sprung.
You know, I've spotted a really obscure flaw in my argument...I might just point it out...
Name:Hojoko
Debate:Nuclear Power, Good or Bad.
Stance:Bad.
Overview: Recently, John McCain proposed that we set up nuclear power plants around the country to deal with the high oil prices and global warming.
I'll challenge hojoko that nuclear power plants are most definitely not a bad idea and John McCain isn't an idiot for saying so lol.
Well, it seems there isn't much news about the debates going on right now, but I am willing to debate about almost anything.
Homosexual Marriage is one I kind of want to do right now.
Would Prefer to be against, but will take either side for the debate!
Previously, I debated against 'gay marriage' in order to demonstrate the importance of a semantical argument (oi, 'voidy, where did the arbitration go!?) My actual stance revolves only around the granting of equal rights, which people generally take to mean that I am pro gay marriage, which, in a sense is true, but not in all senses, depending on how much you confound the term 'marriage'.
So I may take up the debate once again, this time using much less ambiguous terms:
Stance: Gay marriage should be allowed in terms of a legal contract as defined by the state. However terms of this ought to be treated separately from that as defined by the Church as one ought to respect that which is purportedly held sacred insofar as it does not violate a legal right.
That said, the gay marriage debate is kinda getting old for me. I'd like to be a little bolder than this:
Name: Strop
Topic: The value of the nuclear family unit.
Stance: The traditional nuclear family unit (one female parent, one male parent, kids) is not sustainable as the centerpiece of society and we should integrate the notions of other family types into the collective consciousness.
Okay, I'm not looking to debate now, but I sense that people are running out of topics, here are a few I just thought of:
1. Pesticides.
2. Is herbal medication better?
3. Are multicultural societies better? (Now, you might think 'of course they're better!' But it seems that there is a larger amount of racism in these. People don't know anything about the different cultures, excluding the food :P)
4. Education system - In your opinion, is a strict education system better?
-Skyla <3
Thread is locked!