Thread: (PWR) War of thinkers
11-08-2005, 01:34 AM #1
(PWR) War of thinkers
I hope this does not sound stupid.
What if we had a weekly event (1 day) in which people with opposing ideas go head to head in a organized debate.
This could become very interesting and evolve into something bigger.
-Rules would apply.
-A set of judges could be picked to oversee equal oppurtunity, fairness, points, ect.
-The debates must be meaningful
For ex. A panel of judges is picked, maybe 8, who would also be allowed to participate if they choose. This set of judges could ensure a fair debate. For instance the debators must submit the topic, style of debate, ect, 1 day before the debate takes place
-We could have 1 day a week in which all debate takes place.
-All quotes can be no longer than four sentences.
-stats could be kept, points could be given based on votes
-All subjects could be debated that relate to this forum
-the judges should be
a mix of worldviews and belief
Atleast 1 must be a moderator
I also believe mods if they choose should have the final authority in any circumstance.
The panel of judges a could vote on things such as a tie breaker, an obvious bias among those who voted and so on.
Voting could last two days after a poll is open. Voting takes place at the end of the debate. Neigther debator would be allowed to post in the thread after the debate is over untill the poll is closed.
I have many more Ideas about how we could make this work. Let me know what you guys think. I really think it could be interesting if people take it seriously.
Ill post more tomarrow.
11-08-2005, 10:39 AM #2
Doesn't sound stupid bro. I think the hard part would be getting a panel of judges along with both sides to meet in a chat room or what ever at a set time of a set day. I get the impression many people come on here only when they have a free moment away from family, work, ect... But if you would be willing to organize such an event, I would do my best to participate.
11-08-2005, 10:45 AM #3
11-08-2005, 01:03 PM #4Associate Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
sounds really good!
11-08-2005, 02:35 PM #5
that would be fun, in a direct live chat
11-08-2005, 02:46 PM #6Originally Posted by BeerBaron
A debate for example could be timed, it could take place in this forum.
John would take 10 mins to lay out his arguement
5min delay for opposition to read his statement then begin his arguement.
Joe (opposition) then has 10 min to give arguement
John 10 min rebuttal/ arguement
Joe 10 min to make his case
John 5 minutes to make his closing arguement
Joe 5 min to bring out his closing arguement.
Also, this is meant to be fun. A person could lose the debate but still have valid arguement.
I was thinking about attempting to defend something like hinduism or Illuminati
My point is that what ever position you defend, take it seriously.
11-08-2005, 02:51 PM #7
It could take place in live chat too, then transfered over here for a poll
We could have many different forms of debate. The form of debate would be upto those who agree to debate.
It could be timed like the one above, Formal, Informal, Speed, ect
11-08-2005, 03:08 PM #8
I will suggest 5 right now
this is just a suggestion. Let me know what you guys think. this is only my suggestion. 3 more would still be needed.
11-08-2005, 04:10 PM #9
bouncer as a 6th.
11-08-2005, 04:12 PM #10
Other suggestions are
Mainly the people who have been here for a while and understand much of the debate that takes place. Some however have a "mind" that deserves a spot
Money Boss Hustla
Last edited by books555; 11-08-2005 at 10:54 PM.
11-08-2005, 04:13 PM #11
yeah I was thinking bouncer from the beginning.
11-08-2005, 04:24 PM #12
All suggestions are wanted. If anyone would not like to be a judge who I have listed, please say so, this way we can narrow it down.
I definitly need your help Johan in setting this thing up along with anyone else.
I would like to have the a debate next week.
Max would you be willing to debate calvinism vs. free will?
By the way if someone does not want to debate it doesnt mean they cannot defend there position about there beliefs.
11-08-2005, 04:29 PM #13
It would take 1 judge to ok the topic, style, rules, ect.
It would take 5 judges to make a decision concerning a tie, falty voting, ect.
this is once the judges are chosen.
Johan how can we save the debates and have different stats
11-08-2005, 04:32 PM #14
I would love to help and I hope I have time but with uni its hard. But I should be able to next week.
If we do the debates in the forum best way of saving would be a mod locking the thread.
What do you mean with stats in this context?
11-08-2005, 04:35 PM #15
also just to clear one thing up. Would it be betwen 2 people only at each time?
11-08-2005, 04:36 PM #16
We want judges on both sides of issues concerning Politics War Religion.
This will ensure fairness in something like a tie in a debate that the judges must then vote on to decide the outcome
11-08-2005, 04:38 PM #17Originally Posted by johan
No not necessarily, it could be between 2 people with opposing beliefs, or 2on1, or 3 on 3. This is what I was talking about when said it could evolve.
11-08-2005, 04:49 PM #18
ok. I think it would be harder to keep a debate with more than 2 people involved clean and on topic. But if moderated in a good way it should work.
11-08-2005, 08:17 PM #19Originally Posted by books555
ill do anything, debate, judge, whatever.
11-08-2005, 08:22 PM #20
We can change our location right? We could change our location when we are online here and plan to be for a bit to say something like "Ready to Debate" and change it back to whatever when we log off. That way, if i see someone on with that location, we can pm eachother and set a topic, then start a thread with like "<subject> debate, name vs name" and as a first sentence in that thread for people who dont know, it could be like "Please do not post in this thread until you read "Debate over" by one of the presenters."
thats only way we can do it i think with a time limit like you posted. i like the ideas here, i just think itll be hard for people to have the time at the same time.
11-08-2005, 09:52 PM #21Originally Posted by max2extreme
11-08-2005, 10:03 PM #22
Thursday 2000 eastern time
11-08-2005, 10:19 PM #23Originally Posted by 3Vandoo
11-08-2005, 10:23 PM #24
Maybe miltia guy's appartment would do it?
11-08-2005, 10:53 PM #25
Yeah how do we work that out.
11-08-2005, 11:12 PM #26Originally Posted by max2extreme
We dont need any one to judge the debates, unless some one request it. 1 or many judges can look over the debate after it is completed.
-No judge is needed all the info needed about the debate will be in the thread ounce it is finished.
-Any judge can intercede if He chooses during a debate that has foul play.
-Points/votes will be taken away if penalties occur, the only one I can think of is time violations.
The point/vote still needs to be figured out.
Here is a possibility for stats.
(War) Topic: Is the ACLU destroying America.
+ (yes they are) was Tock
- (No they are not) was Books555
Poll: Tock: 10 votes
books: 1 vote
11-09-2005, 12:33 PM #27
Is there any one who I did not mention who would like to be a judge.
11-09-2005, 12:35 PM #28
I may decrease the number of Judges untill I have a better idea of how this thing works out.
11-09-2005, 12:37 PM #29
I may give out prizes for certain debates (that dont suck).
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)