Debate Formats

[ojc02]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Mickey that having separate comment threads is unwieldy. We might decide to have a master comment thread and strictly limit the HU debates to one or two at a time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a sticky with links to the all the relevant threads would be useful. ie Topic suggestions / signups, Debate Formats, all the actual debate links and comment threads.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree with Mickey that having separate comment threads is unwieldy. We might decide to have a master comment thread and strictly limit the HU debates to one or two at a time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a sticky with links to the all the relevant threads would be useful. ie Topic suggestions / signups, Debate Formats, all the actual debate links and comment threads.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is an excellent idea. I will get to work on one.

[Skidoo]

Another idea I would throw out there. Maybe the commentary could go in the same thread as the debate itself, since most will be reading both at the same time anyway. Though the rules would require the contestants to only respond to each other.

[elwoodblues]

Just some general recommendations:
1) Don't just accept the first two people who say "I could debate that." Try to pick people who have expressed a willingness/expertise in prior threads on the same or similar topic. Perhaps a "nomination" thread would be appropriate. Choose the topic, then choose the debaters. It seems like now it is almost vice versa (I want to debate, sure I'll take that topic.)

2) Sticky both the debate thread and the discussion thread so that they are right next to each other at the top of the page.

3) To satisfy everyone's baser instincts, include a vote at the end. The vote should separate out which position you prefer from who "won" the debate.

I agree with x's position
I agree with y's position

I think x "won" the debate
I think y "won" the debate

(copied from previously locked post...)

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
Just some general recommendations:
1) Don't just accept the first two people who say "I could debate that." Try to pick people who have expressed a willingness/expertise in prior threads on the same or similar topic. Perhaps a "nomination" thread would be appropriate. Choose the topic, then choose the debaters. It seems like now it is almost vice versa (I want to debate, sure I'll take that topic.)

2) Stick both the debate thread and the discussion thread so that they are right next to each other at the top of the page.

3) To satisfy everyone's baser instincts, include a vote at the end. The vote should separate out which position you prefer from who "won" the debate.

I agree with x's position
I agree with y's position

I think x "won" the debate
I think y "won" the debate

(copied from previously locked post...)

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely like the dual vote idea at the end.

[valenzuela]

I disagree with the idea of nominating posters, if two posters want to debate let them.
How do you know who is more apropiate to defend what? Ok maybe in AC you can guess borodog its the best debater.
But for instance in Capital punishment , how do you know who the best debaters are?

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with the idea of nominating posters, if two posters want to debate let them.
How do you know who is more apropiate to defend what? Ok maybe in AC you can guess borodog its the best debater.
But for instance in Capital punishment , how do you know who the best debaters are?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care if you pick the best debaters, just competent ones --- else, there is no reason to give them a "private" discussion. If you pick people with a proven track record of solid/informed/well thought out discussion on a particular topic the debates will be much better than what we are seeing right now. Both the AC debate and the Capital Punishment debate are pretty week, in my opinion.

Incidentally, I don't think Borodog would be the best person to choose for an AC thread, but that's just my opinion as well.

[valenzuela]

well Im sorry that my debating hasnt satisfied your quality standards, why dont you sign up for a debate and show us how to debate?
Why has the CP debate been weak? If its weak it means that you have better arguments, point out mistakes in the comments thread instead of simply saying "we need better debaters"

[bkholdem]

I can see both points, the 'best' debators might be the most interesting to read but maybe other people WANT to debate in this kind of format for fun or to learn/challenge themselves, whatever.

[Skidoo]

The problem with voting is there is no auditable paper trail.