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

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

There should be an IQ test.
If you fail, you're banned from the Debate forum for a year or a couple months. Because if you fail, it shows how you have a lack of intelligence, and how you would post a completly idiotic statemen, a dumb arguement, or your stupid statement would only hinder the debate, has nothing to do with the debate itself, or would just show your stupidity.

Example, a debate about a certain genre of music.
This is the person who fails the test.
"I hate rap because it only talks about blah blah blah, (Insert stupid comment here.)" This is basically whats in that forum. Notice how the poster, completely ignores truth, and only focuses on the stereotypes that they believe is truth, in that retarted brain/ or brain look a like of theirs.

Then, after they take and fail the test, they can then take another one after the ban has been lifted, and see if their pass. Etc.

[Sumiaki]

I do admit in posting my 2 cents rather than trying to formulate a rebuttle or constructive. A debate in standard format would be nice.

We should preset a debate like how clubs get members. Sign up and it would work like a batting list in baseball. #1 member of affirmative team goes, #1 member of negative team goes, #2 member of affirmative team goes, #2 member of negative team goes, etc. Any points made not in that order will be disregarded. Perhaps a punishment from the mods if possible. =P

[Ajmalhuuss]

There should be an IQ test.
If you fail, you're banned from the Debate forum for a year or a couple months. Because if you fail, it shows how you have a lack of intelligence, and how you would post a completly idiotic statemen, a dumb arguement, or your stupid statement would only hinder the debate, has nothing to do with the debate itself, or would just show your stupidity.

Example, a debate about a certain genre of music.
This is the person who fails the test.
"I hate rap because it only talks about blah blah blah, (Insert stupid comment here.)" This is basically whats in that forum. Notice how the poster, completely ignores truth, and only focuses on the stereotypes that they believe is truth, in that retarted brain/ or brain look a like of theirs.

Then, after they take and fail the test, they can then take another one after the ban has been lifted, and see if their pass. Etc.

I think you would have most definitly failed that IQ test.

^ then perhaps an special set of rules which apply solely to the debate forum would be a good idea?

i generally oppose this plan, for reasons already expressed.

and alsom how on earth did i make marzipan's list of frequent posters in this forum? how odd.

I like the idea of having a new set of rules that would make the debate thread a little more ligit. The only problem with the rules would be on how to enforce them. Having to monitor all of the posts would require a lot of effort on the part of the authorities. Also depending on how the mondorator looks at it, even if everyone agrees that the post was disobeying the rules, they may think it was okay. I don't think it would actually be possible to come up with a set of exacting rules; most of the rules for a debate forum would end up being too general and leave too many loop holes.

[*disco infiltrator*]

ligit? mondorator?

I don't think you should be going around telling other people that they would fail IQ tests. It's kind of rude, and besides, I haven't seen an incredible amount of intelligence shown from yourself either.

[*I Shot JFK*]

Yeah, and how did I not?

And, we already tried making a special set of rules for the forum, but it didn't work. People still come in all the time going, "Well, I'm not going to read all of this thread, I'll just post what I think", and get all huffypuffy when people tell them that the point has already been stated or refuted. Or, people still get in here and say, "But don't argue with me about it; it's just my opinion". Nate's just trying to think of things to eliminate these people who do not respect what the Debate forum is here for. It's not that hard for someone who is new to read a few of the most recent pages of a thread and get acquainted with what's being talked about now, rather than just the first post in a thread where there's 50 pages. I did it when I first came to Createblog, but, people are too lazy now, I guess...

But, you can't moderate that. I can't warn/suspend people for being too lazy, or not knowing something. That's not fair.

but i think that it is appropriate to this forum to take action against people who ar eblatant time wasters, i.e those who do NOT read the threads, and cause confusion/inconvenience.

and yea, how DID you no tmake that list. wanna trade places?

[Ajmalhuuss]

ligit? mondorator?

I don't think you should be going around telling other people that they would fail IQ tests. It's kind of rude, and besides, I haven't seen an incredible amount of intelligence shown from yourself either.

Ok fine I cant spell.

[sexthybeans]

debate is about opinions, and an opinion is an opinion. if you dont like what someone is saying, ignore them. you dont have to go so far as to block them from the forum.

[Ajmalhuuss]

Once again, its not that we don't want to hear someone's opinion. We wanna hear your opinion but we also want you to tell us why you have the opinion that you have, what convinced you to have that opinion? Why is your opinion better then other's?

[sadolakced acid]

my opinion is better than yours, because i back mine up with facts. usually.

[marzipan]

ok, whoa. no one's opinion is better than someone elses. everyone has a right to have their own opinion. and just because it's not backed up with facts doesn't mean it's not "better." yours might be better explained, though.

[sadolakced acid]

no.

mine is simply better, because a debate can actually happen, rather than pages of "well thatz jus what i think so lol you dun haft 2 b so mean".

[marzipan]

yours is better explained. but an opinion is an opinion.

[sadolakced acid]

with facts or logic.

opinions backed up with facts or logic are worth more than plain opinions.

there's no getting around that.

because plain opinions just aren't debatable.

[Sumiaki]

Actually after looking around I see a lot of "what do you think/believe". I mean if someone saw that they would immediately pose an opinion that may not be based on facts. If anything just ignore it.

[*I Shot JFK*]

Justin is right.

unless it is useful, something is worthless. true of opinions as well as everything else

[Ajmalhuuss]

my opinion is better than yours, because i back mine up with facts. usually.

with facts or logic.

opinions backed up with facts or logic are worth more than plain opinions.

there's no getting around that.

because plain opinions just aren't debatable.

You previously said that your opinions were better then mine. How is that? Mine are backed by logic and facts too. They also leave enough room for debate and others to agree or object.

You sound like such an arrogent idiot.

[sadolakced acid]

well, logically it's because your opinions aren't properly backed up most of the time.

saying "this is an idiotic opinion" and quoting someone else does not constitute a good post.

quite frankly, i don't know of a single post you've made that's been a good contribution to the debate. i probably haven't read all the posts in the debate forum, and i usually don't look to see who posted.

so if you would like to quote some of your posts to me, you know, the good ones, then that would be great. because see, that would be backing up your opinion with facts.

otherwise, the only posts i really see are these jewels:

The truth is that most people do not understand abortion at all. This is why we get comments like these:

Once again, its not that we don't want to hear someone's opinion. We wanna hear your opinion but we also want you to tell us why you have the opinion that you have, what convinced you to have that opinion? Why is your opinion better then other's?

[*mipadi*]

The general idea seems to be that some Debate posters' ideas are better than those of others' because theirs are backed up by facts. I'm hesitant to subscribe to this view, mainly because very few people who post in Debate—even those who back their ideas up with "facts"—actually cite any of their sources. An opinion backed up with uncited facts is, in my mind, not significantly more valuable than one not backed up with any facts at all, yet most people in Debate simply do not cite their sources.

Another startling trend is what I would call the overuse of sources such as Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a great resource for general knowledge, but it is an encyclopedia, and encyclopedias should never be a focus of research—one has to look deeper than that. So merely backing up a statement by citing Wikipedia isn't a very solid basis, either.

Furthermore, there's the fact that many opinions which seem to be supported are merely paraphrashed—or even taken verbatim—from Wikipedia, almost always without a citation. There are many, many times in Debate when someone posts an opinion and I think, "Hey, this kid's pretty sharp. I should do more research on this," and then I go to Wikipedia to get a quick run-down of the topic, and find that the opinion came almost directly from a Wikipedia article. How does paraphrasing an encyclopedia really add anything to Debate?

Finally, I think the goal of the Debate Forum needs to be clarified. Many people seem look at it as "Debate" in terms of a high school forensics competition, in which debators get scored and one is declared a "winner". I think that's a stupid idea for this forum. First of all, the discussion of knowledge shouldn't be about one "winner"—indeed, everyon can "win". Secondly, there's no one to judge who wins and who loses here, so it's hardly a competition—although many frequent posters seem to be more concerned with "pwning" other posters, rather than actually learning.

No, I think Debate is more a place for academic discourse. People post an idea or opinion and throw it up for discussion and critique. Maybe they're trying to convince others of their opinion, but I think that everyone who comes here needs to be ready to listen to others, too—not something that happens very often, because many people in this forum seem to have the idea that they are "too smart" to listen to others.

I think making the Debate forum exclusive just emphasizes the idea that certain cBers are smarter than others, and don't have to listen to the less privileged ones, which couldn't be further from the truth. The Debate forum should be about learning from everyone and discussing with everyone, rather than dismissing or mocking the views of others who aren't as accustomed to the traditions of the Debate forum.

Besides, get a grip: A lot of people who come in here are 12, 13, 14 years old, and aren't use to discussing anything on an academic or intellectual level. They need to learn the "rules of the game", so to speak. By kicking people out, you could be missing out on a very intelligent debator.

[sadolakced acid]

well, see, michael, your opinion is much better than someone who says simply "well i don't agree i think it's this way" because we can actually debate from your opinion.

people who just post opinions, you have to go and ask them why and hope they have some reasons, and such.

makes debate a bit harder.

and thus, those opinions are worth less than an opinion backed up by facts or logic.

i mean, come on. a post that just says "i think abortion is horrible and wrong don't get one!"

is worth a lot less than one that says

"i think abortion is horrible and wrong don't get one because ... (insert logical explanation here, not just 'jesus says so' or something. )"

[*kryogenix*]

I think we can compromise here.

How about we make debate closed, but the only requirement is that you have read and understand the rules? Close debate to only certain groups, but allow people to join the group when they pm a mod that they have read the rules? This way, everyone who feels that they need to post will be forced to read the rules before they can post in debate, but it still lets everyone in who wants to participate.

[NoSex]

I think we can compromise here.

How about we make debate closed, but the only requirement is that you have read and understand the rules? Close debate to only certain groups, but allow people to join the group when they pm a mod that they have read the rules? This way, everyone who feels that they need to post will be forced to read the rules before they can post in debate, but it still lets everyone in who wants to participate.

That sounds like a great idea, and actually, kind of close to what I would have wanted anyways.

[radhikaeatsraman]

the question is, how would we moderate those who just PM'ed mods without really reading the rules and are just being idiots? do we disable their posting in the debate forum? delete their posts?

we need a proper way to moderate the forum under those guidelines.

[*kryogenix*]

the question is, how would we moderate those who just PM'ed mods without really reading the rules and are just being idiots? do we disable their posting in the debate forum? delete their posts?

we need a proper way to moderate the forum under those guidelines.

How will they know who to pm without having read the rules? I suppose if they start spamming or some other kind of abuse, they can be removed from the usergroup.

I'm really in favor of keeping the status quo though. But if it's as much as a problem as some of you guys say it is, we should have some kind of backup plan.

[radhikaeatsraman]

i like your plan, kryo. i sincerely think it should be implemented, but everyone starts out as a potential applicant instead of having the 'debate elite' (if you will) get automatic preference. =/

[uLoVeMikeRoch]

the question is, how would we moderate those who just PM'ed mods without really reading the rules and are just being idiots? do we disable their posting in the debate forum? delete their posts?

we need a proper way to moderate the forum under those guidelines.

My Idea, THE IQ TEST!!