Making the Debate Forum Exclusive, What do you think? Options

[NoSex]

As I have spent a significant amount of time participating within these debate forums, I have come to a conviction that these boards would benifit greatly if this page were to become exclusive. Exclusive in the sense that direct permission would have to be given to allow one to participate, as in post, in these forums. Once permission has been granted that individual would have the right to normal posting within this forum.

I suggest this because I believe the quality of these debate forums is suffering and that such an action would greatly increase said quality. Memebers far too oftenly post arguments to never return to the debate threads. Many members do not respect the rules of debate, or make a mockery of such. Some members do not seem capable to be included in a reasonable and intellectual debate. A majority of the arguments posted are repeated arguments which have been served pages worth of rebuttles, yet continue to be posted. This all disrupts the point, and the enjoyement driven from these threads. Because of these reasons, and more, I wish that we could create a more close-knit, intellectual, and interested party for the debate section of Createblog.

(I wanted to have the debate in here, as it was a debate, and I don't think I have any kind of serious influence on policy making here. I just want to see what everyone else thinks. After some deliberation here, maybe some of us could bring this idea, or another, to the attention of those who do make policy here.)

Discuss?

[Ajmalhuuss]

I can see your point and I agree with you completely. I have not made too many posts in the debate forum only because I get tired of having to read through a 100 pages of nonsense in order to find one good post to refer to. Some members get tied up with their own worthless arguments and forget the importance of the topic, leading the whole thread down the drain.

What I do not understand is what credentials would you use to decide which members would be given access and which denied?

[NoSex]

What I do not understand is what credentials would you use to decide which members would be given access and which denied?

That, of course, would be the largest obstacle.
Designated moderators would be involved in allowing permission into the debate threads.
They could have personal interviews with applicants over PM's, IM, or E-mail. All of this contact information would be stickied and provided for interested parties. The moderator would be looking for the applicant's intentions, maturity, and capabilities. It may be asked of the applicant to provide a brief written work of expository writing or a list of positions on major issues with short justifications for each (in fact, a list of important issues could be suggested). The moderator would use his or her own discretion in accepting an applicant. This, of course, is one way that it could be done, among numerous others that exist.

I have seen this work very well on other community boards and was very impressed by the increased quality of their debate threads. I don't think for a second that this would be too difficult to impliment.

[AngryBaby]

im sorry but i dont think you should have to have an interview to see whether or not your capable to express your opinion. even if the opinion is basically a repeat of another. its still someone's view. now i can see if you were trying to make .....some kind of debate "team" or something of the sort, but for just a createblog centered thing. is it really unecessary? the idea of mods just simply rejecting somebody of the community becuase they dont think they're "capable of being mature" kinda urks me.

i think this idea will just create alot of distance in the community

[marzipan]

^ i kind of agree with evan.

a debate team would be nice. i would want to take part in that, but interviewing people seems a little unneccesary. it wouldn't be very difficult, but it could be handled easier. but i do agree with you; we should make the debate forum exclusive so that the discussions could have more depth.

[*Zatanna*]

im sorry but i dont think you should have to have an interview to see whether or not your capable to express your opinion. even if the opinion is basically a repeat of another. its still someone's view. now i can see if you were trying to make .....some kind of debate "team" or something of the sort, but for just a createblog centered thing. is it really unecessary? the idea of mods just simply rejecting somebody of the community becuase they dont think they're "capable of being proficient" kinda urks me. who are they to judge them?

i think this idea will just create alot of distance in the community

There is a big difference between simply expressing your opinion and debating about a topic.

And proficiency isn't being questioned, it's respect for the art of debate.

cB is actually the first forum I've participated in where there wasn't exclusivity in certain forums. I do not think that there should be a rigid application process. I do think that if Debate was a rights/permissions enabled group, that those who disrespect the debating process could be weeded out.

[NoSex]

im sorry but i dont think you should have to have an interview to see whether or not your capable to express your opinion. even if the opinion is basically a repeat of another.

The debate thread isn't about expressing your opinion. It's about justifying that opinion, supporting it, and intelligently challenging the opinions of other people. The problem is that alot of people who post in the debate thread feel that it is, somehow, exclusively about the simple expression of opinion, which it most certainly is not. These people disrupt the actual purpose of the debate, and as they have no intent to actually debate they have no use in the debate thread.

The lounge and other such forums are available for simple expression of an opinion.

the idea of mods just simply rejecting somebody of the community becuase they dont think they're "capable of being mature" kinda urks me.

i think this idea will just create alot of distance in the community

1. It would be a rejection from posting in the debate thread. Not the entire community.
2. It would not be a simple choice. I doubt many members would be rejected.
3. Those who would have the will to apply, I'm sure, would be worthy to post in the threads.
4. This would help weed out alot of problems we have with the debate threads, including but not limited to: "Drive-by posting" in the debate threads. Non-repeat visitors. Incompetent-Ill-Intentioned posters. Fewer spam.

In fact, I think this has the potentional to bring alot of people together. And, as I have said before, I have seen it work very well in other community boards.

cB is actually the first forum I've participated in where there wasn't exclusivity in certain forums. I do not think that there should be a rigid application process. I do think that if Debate was a rights/permissions enabled group, that those who disrespect the debating process could be weeded out.

I don't think I would really want a rigid application process myself, I was thinking a more laid back form. Although, what I described may have seemed a bit rigid. Either way, I would love to see Debate become "rights/permissions enabled." However we should weed out those members who disrupt the debating process is very much (should I say it?) up for debate.

[marzipan]

if you've seen this work before, and if most people and staff members agree with it, why not give it a try? i'm up to it.

[AngryBaby]

i didnt mean "REMOVED" from the community, i know, the debate thread. what i was hinting at was, that every member here is a part of a community. rejecting and accepting will give kids the impression, "what the hell? how is he/she any better than me?"


and every debate, when it begins, starts with an expression of opinion, THEN someone either agrees with it or debates it. in my personal opinion, the person who made "white history month" was pretty naive and ignorant to not understand why african americans were givin a month. but, turns out this topic brought up alot of views and debates and even fights. despite the original topic makers naiveity.

debating DOES root from people opinions. i mean what do you think when someone says "i disagree with homosexuality because of___" is? its still basically an opinion

and sure this would bring people together, the people who take the time to join that is. and if those folks become close nit, thats just a clique isnt it? and "cb's getting too cliquey"

and if not many members would be rejected then whats the point?

[NoSex]

rejecting and accepting will give kids the impression, "what the hell? how is he/she any better than me?"

I really don't think that it will be as large as an issue as you suspect. I would imagine that most of the people who honestly want to be able to post in the debate thread will be allowed to, most of the other members may not even bother applying.

and every debate, when it begins, starts with an expression of opinion, THEN someone either agrees with it or debates it.

The problem is that a large majority of the debate threads have become members simply expressing their opinions. Not intelligently, not constructively, and not in an objective manner. People are not adhering to the basic ideas of debate in that not many people are actually justifying their beliefs and or creating rebuttles to beliefs that they disagree with. Otherwise, we'll end up resorting to a long stream of ad nasueam arguments, and this greatly hinders the quality of the Debate Subforum.

and sure this would bring people together, the people who take the time to join that is. and if those folks become close nit, thats just a clique isnt it? and "cb's getting too cliquey"

Whether this is a legitimate problem or not is hard to tell. If the debate group, if one existed, began to harass non-debate group members, then maybe we can talk about it. In which case, I'm sure we could deal with it. Before then, it's just a slippery slope.

and if not many members would be rejected then whats the point?

I thought I explained that?
Anyways, those who take the time to register are probably good intentioned.
Those who are ill-intentioned or do not care to respect the ideals of debate would probably not care to bother, thus weeding that problem out. If they did apply, and were allowed in, only to start trouble, they could easily be denied further access yet still have the ability to continue posting elsewhere on Createblog.
Also, this would greatly reduce the level of "drive-by posting" here, as well as eliminate those posters who never have an intent to return and follow up on their arguments or answer other debators' questions.

[sadolakced acid]

i don't like it.

even if it were to work- which i don't think it will- i don't like it.

that's not the problem with the debate forum.

we've always handled the idiots well. there's just not enough people sticking around to handle the idiots.

[NoSex]

i don't like it.

even if it were to work- which i don't think it will- i don't like it.

that's not the problem with the debate forum.

we've always handled the idiots well. there's just not enough people sticking around to handle the idiots.

1. Why don't you like it?
2. Why don't you think it will work?
3. What is the problem with the debate forum?
4. Why do you figure that people don't stick around long enough?

[AngryBaby]

now dont get me wrong though. i know what your trying to do. and nothing's wrong with that.

but im just thinking whether it will actually help the debate forum, or hinder it. im never really on the debate forum that often, but i never thought it was that bad spam wise. i always thought people kinda respected it and stayed away from it. (at least in comparison to lets say "the lounge")


but what im basically thinking is, if you subtract all the people who posts twin opinions and "drive by posters". who's left? just a good few im thinking, the debate topic isnt really the most bustling of thread as it is, so im just imagining what it will be like with this update. i just....dont see it as being very successful paricipant wise. making it kinda a ghost town =/

because people like me, knowing i have to go through an "interview" just to reply to debate, would turn me off to it. and i think im not unique on this.


hmm, lets see. give me an example of what you want your "ideal debate forum" to be.
you gave us ways in which you think we can get to it, but maybe if you explain to me what your ideas or plans are for the forum. i can sympathize with you better? then we can see a way of getting to it as a whole. hell, give me a scenerio if you want lol. but maybe this will help me understand what it is you exactly want alittle better.

[sadolakced acid]

1. Why don't you like it?
2. Why don't you think it will work?
3. What is the problem with the debate forum?
4. Why do you figure that people don't stick around long enough?

1. i don't like it because i joined simply for the debate forum, and under your proposed rules would not have been aloud to post. we've had good newbies post and such- i'd rather put up with the idiots than keep out everyone.

2. i don't work because it would kill the debate forum. The debates that can be won are. The ones that can't become stale mates. The only reprieve is when a newbie comes in- idiot or not, and posts. If they're an idiot, the more likely case, then they provide adequete sport. driving away a spammer or newbie is often the only action in debate.

3. the problem is that there just aren't enough people interested.

4. name me 10 people active in debate, as in, they post in almost every thread regularly.

[marzipan]

4. name me 10 people active in debate, as in, they post in almost every thread regularly.

1. michael
2. you
3. Acid Bath Slayer
4. Uronacid
5. Spiritual Winged Aura
6. I Shot JFK
7. Paradox of Life

and i've seen more. but these are people i've seen post frequently. and maybe it's not how much you post, but the quality of your posting, and whether you contribute something thought-provoking to the thread.

[sadolakced acid]

quality posts are good. but when it comes to dealing with spammers and idiots- quantity is needed as well.

which is what we're lacking.

[AngryBaby]

1. michael
2. you
3. Acid Bath Slayer
4. Uronacid
5. Spiritual Winged Aura
6. I Shot JFK
7. Paradox of Life

that's 7...

but seriously thats it? you all just....debateing against eachother, again and again? sounds boring....

[sadolakced acid]

which is why we need the spammers and idiots.

we can't just keep debating each other. eventually we'll either agree or stalemate.

[marzipan]

that's 7...

i know..i just picked 7 people who contributed the most. i said that there were others too.

which is why we need the spammers and idiots.

we can't just keep debating each other. eventually we'll either agree or stalemate.

yes, spammers and idiots add to the forum, but they're not needed in the debate forum. that's what the sandbox is for.

[demolished]

1. michael
2. you
3. Acid Bath Slayer
4. Uronacid
5. Spiritual Winged Aura
6. I Shot JFK
7. Paradox of Life

and i've seen more. but these are people i've seen post frequently. and maybe it's not how much you post, but the quality of your posting, and whether you contribute something thought-provoking to the thread.

i feel special ;]



hahaaha. i'm an idiot.

[Paradox of Life]

4. name me 10 people active in debate, as in, they post in almost every thread regularly.

"Post in almost every thread regularly"? People post only in topics (hopefully) they have opinions about. Not everone is good at politics, religion, law, and social issues, so we obviously can't post in a lot of topics.

1. michael
2. you
3. Acid Bath Slayer
4. Uronacid
5. Spiritual Winged Aura
6. I Shot JFK
7. Paradox of Life

and i've seen more. but these are people i've seen post frequently. and maybe it's not how much you post, but the quality of your posting, and whether you contribute something thought-provoking to the thread.

Ooh, I'm honored.

Anyway ... I really don't think it's necessary to exclude people deemed "unworthy" from the debate forum. We should probably just implement a few rules like:

1. If you post an argument in a topic, go back and see the responses you've received.
2. Speak clearly, in complete sentences and try your best to spell correctly.
3. Do not repeat points that have already been made. Respond to other peoples' posts or describe new points to add to the discussion.
4. Skim through the posts before you post your own to get an idea of what's already happened and what would be appropriate for you to say.

And then give verbal warnings to those who don't follow the rules. And if they are exceedingly disruptive, we can exclude them personally from the debate forum. So instead of banning everyone except a few, we can accept everyone except a few.

[Paradox of Life]

I think Kyrogenix is pretty active too. And there are more people and potential awesome debators joining every day.

[*kryogenix*]

I don't count for much anymore since my activity here has dropped, but I don't think we should make it exclusive. Not letting new people in because they're not on an exclusive list means that people who might have a new point to make will not be able to post.

Maybe, a new usergroup can be created. People who routinely abuse the debate rules will be placed in this usergroup, and they will not be able to post in debate. But I'd prefer if people are innocent until proven guilty.

[sadolakced acid]

I think Kyrogenix is pretty active too. And there are more people and potential awesome debators joining every day.

and if the debate forum were exclusive, what would happen to these potentially awesome debators joining every day?

[*mipadi*]

I probably couldn't disagree with this position more.

Why? The Debate Forum is already primarily made up of a core group of elitists who think that their knowledge—and opinion—of certain topics gives them a special ranking above that of other members. The Debate Forum is, quite frankly, hostile to anyone new who comes in here, people who express another opinion. Sure, some idiots make their way into here, but who cares? Just deal with it.

I find issues with who would be qualified to pick who should be granted permission to post in the Debate forum. I'm going to publicly post, here and now, that if such a policy is implemented, I will never, ever sit on such a committee. I probably won't even come to the Debate forum anymore.

Everyone has a right to express their thoughts. We might think some people's thoughts are ridiculous and baseless, but people still have a right to express their opinions. And that is a principle I will stand for no matter what. No one—no one—here is qualified to judge who is good enough to post their thoughts in this forum.