Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My personal belief, that all argument should be backed up by corroborating evidence.
.
Or be prepared to. It is not reasonable to expect every poster to provide a citation to every assertion, like "Lincoln was shot". But if challenged, should be prepared to. Many facts are well-known, and are offered only because the prior poster might have made a point in which the fact was not taken into account.
In fact, most arguments are not about whether something is a fact, but whether that fact supports the assertion it is applied to. Anybody can link to a fact, but the art of argumentation is to convince everyone that the fact is relevant.
Or be prepared to. It is not reasonable to expect every poster to provide a citation to every assertion, like "Lincoln was shot". But if challenged, should be prepared to. Many facts are well-known, and are offered only because the prior poster might have made a point in which the fact was not taken into account.
In fact, most arguments are not about whether something is a fact, but whether that fact supports the assertion it is applied to. Anybody can link to a fact, but the art of argumentation is to convince everyone that the fact is relevant.
I can see that. However, what steps should be taken when that information isn't presented? Also, should there be a timeline? Should threads be put on "hold" if someone goes on vacation?
I know several times, I leave for a week or two, and then come back and have to respond to posts directed at me.
This forum also has no room for racism, but it is allowed to continue unchecked, aside from those that call them out on it, and nothing is ever done. What should be allowed to happen is a temporary lock, allowed by senior members, or sub-moderators, or something, until the issue can be sorted out.
First, what is and is not racist, can itself be debated. Aside from that, a lot of things that almost everyone sees as racist can, and perhaps should be open to debate. Personally, I won't discuss anything with someone who discusses out of anger, hate, or any negative emotion. But you don't really want to start getting into styfling those ideas simply because they are politically incorrect.
You know, I would love to have a debate where we can use data. I, usually, differentiate between what I am thinking and where I can go back it up if necessary. Unfortunately, I feel like I end up debating someone's ego instead of the information. There are topics that we never get to kick back and explore because of the end result.
I left this morning with a thread I intended to get back to, and it is gone. I have either a feast or famine with time, as well.
I love the history thread, I stopped going over there because they got way far into this (or that)type of military vehicle. They are real kicked back, which is my preference.
One of the major problems I see is that some people are incapable of distinguishing attacks on their arguments from attacks on them as individuals. This quickly descends into personal attacks and exchanges of non-substantive posts.
I think it is time for the users of the Great Debates forum begin to police it ourselves. When people who are not interested in genuine debate post in the forum, it is incumbent upon us to let them know in no uncertain terms that they are not welcome here, and then ignore them. This can be difficult once a bunch of them get a foothold, for they then encourage each other. But we need to hold firm and weed (or wait) them out--they usually disappear in a week or two when the novelty wears off, and if we can keep the new ones from feeling welcome, maybe we can restore order here.
The History Forum is a good model. The regulars there are good, conscientious history buffs, and have no patience for wild unsubstantiated reckless quips. Interlopers are quickly made to feel unwelcome. We here at Great Debates are going to have to do that, too.
This forum is entitled to the same on-topic policing as any other forum, even though there is no "topic" here, there are guidelines. Oddly, this is the only forum that is routinely allowed to wander off the guidelines, in spite of it's so-called stricter guidelines. If we want to save it, we will have to do it ourselves. Stop this from becoming another Politics and Other Controversies bash-fest, if it hasn't already become one.
Thanks for posting this.
I am "self-banned" from "Politics" for that very reason. Huge time-(and bandwidth!) suck IMHO.
Some of the other posters ideas have inspired me. Perhaps we could have some sort of a "time" limit here? Only instead of time, maybe it could be post count: You get 5 (or 10 or?) posts per thread to make your point. After a certain time run, the thread is locked and closed
What do you all think?
I am argumentative by nature and love debate , so I would hate to see this forum morph into "just another politcs/bashing forum".
I am "self-banned" from "Politics" for that very reason. Huge time-(and bandwidth!) suck IMHO.
Some of the other posters ideas have inspired me. Perhaps we could have some sort of a "time" limit here? Only instead of time, maybe it could be post count: You get 5 (or 10 or?) posts per thread to make your point. After a certain time run, the thread is locked and closed
What do you all think?
I am argumentative by nature and love debate , so I would hate to see this forum morph into "just another politcs/bashing forum".
A post count would be impossible.
I've made posts that have gotten responses for months afterwards. If I respond to each of them, I'm sure there are posts where i have well more than 5 or 10 responses.
The problem comes in, when people don't read back through the entire thread before stating their point. Then we get into reposting the same idea over, and over again.
Nice try 88.... If I am on that list, then you would be on that list too. Thing there is I don't go run to mommy mods, and to tell the truth i don't hink you do either. If you I am disappointed, but like i said I highly doubt that.
You wouldn't tell me either, so I will never really know.
I've made posts that have gotten responses for months afterwards. If I respond to each of them, I'm sure there are posts where i have well more than 5 or 10 responses.
The problem comes in, when people don't read back through the entire thread before stating their point. Then we get into reposting the same idea over, and over again.
I agree. That is why I also propose a time limit. C-D , in general, likes to keep threads "active" so that people searching at a later date can find info and ask questions. But on this particular forum, it might be useful to close threads after a week or two. Just MHO.
The thread count would need to be self-imposed. Do most poster's here have the self control to do that??? It could be fun. One would need to think very long and hard before hitting the "enter" button.
It is not my idea of what is acceptable to have posters arguing a point in the debate by calling people sickos.
As for the McKinley reference, it is only known that Milk met McKinley during the year in which McKinley turned 17. McKinley's needs were described as "father figure", which, at least in my family, was not a sexual relationship, and you hve only circumstantial evidence that Milk and McKinley had a sexual relationship at that time.
As for your silly sodomy reference, virtually every Congressman from Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia lived in a state in which sodomy, even between man and wife, was illegal until the US Supreme Court stuck down those laws. So any congressman, any judge, from those states who ever did it before 2003 with his wife in any other but the missionary position was as much a "sex offender" as Harvey Milk.
So be careful who you call a pervert. Dare I even suggest you look in a mirror? Ask yourself what states you and your wife have lived in or vacationed in (but don't answer it here. We don't want to know, and what happens in your bedroom is not of interest to liberal minds.). Alabama, by the way, was a liberal island of enlightened reason. Married couples got a pass.
I'm sorry Jtur88 does this personal attack on me and my wife that you made fit in with the TOS's and the degradation of the Great Debate's forum? Would this fall into the check your emotion category and reread before you post?
Last edited by Bulldogdad; 05-16-2010 at 05:17 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
from "Politics" for that very reason. Huge time-(and bandwidth!) suck IMHO.
and love debate 
, so I would hate to see this forum morph into "just another politcs/bashing forum". 
