Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
The K5 Debates

By coljac in Meta
Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 02:39:16 AM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)
Kuro5hin.org

The debate is a fun, interesting and balanced way to explore a topic. A formal debate gives equal time to proponents of both sides of an issue, and forces them to think very carefully about their position and express it as succinctly as possible. This could prove to be an interesting way to collaboratively author a story for k5. Here I propose a simple way to run a debate, ask for suggestions and votes on the first topic, and call for participants.


A k5 Debate (capital-D, as opposed to the everyday enlightened discussion that happens on k5) will be structured in the following way.

1. There are three participants: The Moderator, the Affirmative, and the Negative.

2. The Affirmative and Negative argue for and against the stated topic. The Moderator assembles the words of the Affirmative and Negative writers, performs any necessary formatting and editing, and posts the story on kuro5hin (where as a mere formality it is voted to the front page).

3. Each of the two debaters writes up to 600 words on the stated topic, and sends them to the moderator. When they have received both pieces, the moderator forwards them on to the respective opponents. The debaters then write another 400 words in rebuttal, and the process is repeated with a final 200-word counter-rebuttal and summary. Thus, a total of 1,200 words (or in k5 units, one-sixth of a Cheeseburgerbrown diary) is written by each debater.

4. It is up to the moderator to set and enforce deadlines from the two writers. If they wish, the moderator can have backup debaters standing by in case of flakiness or obvious debate sabotage by the participants. The debaters should have at least a week or so to research and write their pieces.

5. The "winner" of the debate can be decided by a poll - not on the subject itself, but on the quality of the argument presented by the authors. This winner is then encouraged to become moderator of the next debate under the format. They can take responsibility for soliciting feedback on the next topic, finding debaters, altering the format or finding another moderator. Ideally, an eclectic range of topics (not just current events) should be put to the people for a vote.

If this idea should be well-received, I will act as the moderator for the first debate. Once a topic is chosen, if you would like to participate contact me here or at debates(@)coljac.net. Please suggest some interesting topics that I can put to the vote.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
First debate topic:
o Everyone should learn English. 15%
o Faith is a valid source of knowledge. 16%
o The US was right to invade Iraq. 10%
o There is no such thing as "global warming". 10%
o The government should fund alternative medicine. 9%
o Humanity needs one world government. 36%

Votes: 114
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o Also by coljac


Display: Sort:
The K5 Debates | 97 comments (85 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden)
too much like a game. (2.50 / 6) (#1)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 02:21:39 PM EST

obviously, Debate is literally a game, but attaching some sort of reward other than simply winning makes the whole thing a game in the crass sense usually used to describe moderation and the friend/foe system at slashdot.

also, you imply some sort of serial aspect, which would be overly restrictive. it would make far more sense for people to simply get together and decide to have a debate, rather than be somehow appointed moderator. in other words, three people ought to just get together and say "you be moderator, you be negative, i'll be affirmative, etc."

the idea of institutionalizing this and facilitating it via some new section/subsystem of scoop and/or k5 is an excellent one, though.

_____

stalinism

dave dean

I Concur (none / 0) (#2)
by LittleZephyr on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 02:24:59 PM EST

nt.
(\♥/) What if instead of posting that comment,
(0.-) you had actually taken a knife and stabbed
("_") me in the eye? You murderer. ~ Rusty

[ Parent ]
Good feedback (none / 1) (#4)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 02:47:52 PM EST

I didn't see the "reward" - being moderator - as much of an incentive. In fact, it's almost a punishment, but I thought it would be a good suggestion in order to keep the ball rolling and keep the debate flowing. What, specifically, do you suggest?

Of course there's nothing stopping anyone from getting together at any time - I encourage it!



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

what i suggest (none / 1) (#7)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:04:27 PM EST

is written in the original comment. to wit: people should organize themselves rather than at the compulsion of the software -- much as they currently do with articles. mechanized inheritance of moderator status has many obvious problems, including delays due to non-compliance of the appointed moderator (i.e. he doesn't show up), unnatural restrictions on who and what is debated, the inevitable formation of power differentials within the userbase and the attendant politics, etc. in fact, the entire idea of being a moderator without being attached to a specific debate is bizarre and ought to be discarded.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

OK. (none / 0) (#18)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:27:46 PM EST

I wasn't trying to suggest mechanizing things, or making it too formal. Everyone is free to do their own thing; I was looking for cooperation on my own thing. However, I'll amend the article to make this clear. Thanks for the feedback.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

ah, i may have misread your article. (none / 0) (#20)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:37:34 PM EST

i naturally assumed you were thinking of changing the site somehow to facilitate this.

in my opinion, this is a doomed effort because of the "-1, fuck you" culture around here. in my opinion, you'd have to be an idiot to engage in something like this, given that the format is inherently incoherent, incompatible with the community editing process, and necessarily controversial. what you will see is that the first one of these will be resoundingly rejected and you'll have three people who wasted a lot of time.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

Pessemism (none / 0) (#40)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 10:54:57 PM EST

Oh, I don't know. If the debate actually is interesting to read, it will probably get voted up. If not, we'll put it on the web elsewhere anyway. If I'm going to keep hanging round k5, might as well try to do my part to make it better.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

also, (none / 3) (#8)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:05:51 PM EST

consider different formats of debate, such as policy. man can't live on lincoln-douglas alone.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

I like cross-examination (none / 1) (#16)
by Battle Troll on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:00:31 PM EST

By far my favorite growing up.
--
Skarphedinn was carrying the axe with which he had killed Thrainn Sigfusson and which he called 'Battle Troll.'
Njal's Saga, ca 1280 AD
[ Parent ]
Objection, your Honor... (none / 1) (#78)
by skyknight on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 01:53:37 PM EST

I pose to the court that Battle Troll does not have "free will", that Battle Troll is in fact naught but a collection of particles behaving in deterministic fashion.

It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
overruled! (none / 0) (#92)
by rmg on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 08:07:07 PM EST



_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

I do not recognize the authority of this court./nt (none / 0) (#93)
by skyknight on Wed Jul 07, 2004 at 10:13:18 AM EST



It's not much fun at the top. I envy the common people, their hearty meals and Bruce Springsteen and voting. --SIGNOR SPAGHETTI
[ Parent ]
rmg for mayor of kuro5hin (nt) (none / 2) (#6)
by circletimessquare on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:03:25 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
No way. (2.75 / 4) (#38)
by Empedocles on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 10:46:40 PM EST

There's a rule somewhere about being both village idiot and mayor at the same time.

---
And I think it's gonna be a long long time
'Till touch down brings me 'round again to find
I'm not the man they think I am at home

[ Parent ]
The rule is (2.50 / 4) (#52)
by godix on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 02:23:19 AM EST

the mayor has to be the village idiot. How else do you think we get stuck with politicians like Bush, Kerry, Chirac, Blair, etc?

So on that note, RMG for mayor!

They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans, wonder why people thinks he hates America?
[ Parent ]

heh (none / 1) (#3)
by NaCh0 on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 02:37:16 PM EST

You call a normal day here wankery and now you want to do this??? omg ror

--
K5: Your daily dose of socialism.
Not all all (none / 2) (#5)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 02:56:42 PM EST

I called it a combination of enlightened debate and wanktrollery. I do my bit for one side, you for the other, and so the balance is maintained.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

Suggestion: (2.71 / 14) (#12)
by rusty on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:34:52 PM EST

Instead of doing the debate in private between the moderator and the participants, you could open a debate diary where the question is posted, and have the participants post their responses there. Others could comment, but the "official" debate is only between the two participants. When it's done, the moderator writes up the official thread for a story, and people can continue on their own in comments.

I think the advantage would be that participants can use the input of other commenters to bolster their arguments. So it's more of a debate where each side has an open panel of advisers, but all the input eventually has to be boiled down and presented by one person per side.

____
Not the real rusty

i notice a bias (2.75 / 4) (#14)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:56:43 PM EST

toward keeping this within the framework of existing site features.

wouldn't it be preferrable to add some new mechanism and section to facilitate this? this is collaborative media in its purest form.

in that connection, isn't it high time we allowed shared authorship of articles, i.e. articles giving multiple authors direct editing privileges and attribution to multiple authors?

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

Sure (2.75 / 4) (#22)
by rusty on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:43:38 PM EST

in that connection, isn't it high time we allowed shared authorship of articles, i.e. articles giving multiple authors direct editing privileges and attribution to multiple authors?

That would be an excellent patch. I think some people have plans like that in the works, but I'm sure they'd welcome your help. Many links to scoop development resources can be found at the scoop homepage to get you started.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

indeed. (none / 1) (#23)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:47:07 PM EST

i'd consider implementing a patch for debates, but i do not care about multiple authorship enough. since you've expressed no interest in the former, however, i sure as hell won't waste my time on something that will probably be rejected.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

i'm sorry, (none / 1) (#24)
by rmg on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:48:33 PM EST

not "implementing" a patch, rather "writing" one.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

Indeed, thought a couple of things (2.25 / 4) (#19)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:35:36 PM EST

Hi rusty. What you suggest is perfectly workable, and a good idea. However, I think there are some benefits to having a moderator that make it worth experimenting with. Firstly, the moderator can gather the works and make sure that each of the participants writes their pieces independently (without seeing the other's work), whereas in a diary it's sequential. The moderator can enforce the word limits (for fairness, I think both participants have to have the same constraints). Finally, they can do minor edits, and present it in a nice way.

I'm not saying debate within the current parameters of k5 is broken, far from it. This is just an experiment, a new way of collaboratively writing a story. I'm certainly not suggesting that scoop needs to be modified or anything.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

Right (2.50 / 4) (#21)
by rusty on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:42:00 PM EST

I wasn't implying that your way would require site changes or anything, and I think there still should be a moderator. What I was thinking was it would use your system, and there'd be some kind of specific posting deadline for the participants -- they'd have to post each installment of their case within say three minutes either way of a specified time. Basically my idea was to use your system, but replace emails to the moderator with posts to the moderator's diary.

If you wanted it a little more controlled, moderators could collect the official debate posts by email and post them to the diary at the same time, to preserve a strict "no peeking" policy. I was just thinking that having the ongoing debate be in public might make it more interesting, with other commenters weighing in as it goes, and possibly adding information to the debate.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

So are you saying (none / 2) (#26)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:57:59 PM EST

That the idea is OK, but I should do it as a diary instead of via the queue? With any diary or story, community comment and debate is encouraged (really, that's the whole point). Or did I miss something?

I would of course always favor the diary over spamming the queue with a vanity project, but who could I realistically get to write a thoughtful piece of point-counterpoint in my diary where it will only be read by a handful of people after it falls off the front page? The conceit of the idea is that it will create stories that are worthy in their own right - at least, that's the experiment.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

Oh also (2.50 / 4) (#25)
by rusty on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:50:05 PM EST

This will be a hell of a lot more interesting if the participants know something about the subject, and even more so if we have some reason to care what they think. That is, a debate between two random people about, say, the Bush tax cuts is way less interesting than a debate about the Bush tax cuts between a professional economist who thinks they're a bad idea and a Republican political organizer who supports them. You know what I mean? It's more interesting if the debaters have a stake in the issue, and already have a solid understanding of it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Exactly! (2.50 / 4) (#27)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 05:01:50 PM EST

Hence the suggestion for a moderator to carefully choose the participants. In fact, that's why I wouldn't want to open the thing for anyone to comment until after the two chosen experts were done and the story was ready.

That said, the point isn't necessarily to find two subject-matter experts, just someone who can do the research and craft an interesting argument. I imagine some would even be keen to take the opposite side to their personal beliefs as a challenge. In any case, I agree choosing two interesting writers is necessary.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

Hrmm (none / 2) (#49)
by The Solitaire on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 09:23:33 PM EST

That would mean I would have to read the diaries... ick. Wading through the trollish crap that infests the diary section to find an interesting debate is not my idea of a good time...

Is there some way that the debates could get flagged or something? Preferably a way that won't get abused by the trolls? :)

I need a new sig.
[ Parent ]

A few suggestions (none / 2) (#13)
by cr8dle2grave on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:45:11 PM EST

1 The moderator should have a unique account
Were the moderator position to include the password for a designated account used exclusively for posting the redacted effort to the queue, it would then be possible to pull up a history of the debate series by viewing that account's story history. This could work as follows: After the votes were tallied and a winner decided, the moderator would announce the results and contact winner, passing along the password to the moderator account. On receiving the moderator account password, the victor from the just completed round would then change the password and contact information for the moderator account.

2 The allotted word count you suggest (600-400-200) seems unnecessarily restrictive.

---
Unity of mankind means: No escape for anyone anywhere. - Milan Kundera


Conciseness (none / 0) (#29)
by stoothman on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 05:13:18 PM EST

Your first point is very good.  It might be a little difficult to administer in the long run but it seems an excellent way to handle it.

However, I disagree with your second point.   I think part of the purpose of this exercise, IMHO, is to see excellent debate in action and help foster it generally on K-5.  I believe by placing an arbitrary limit on the number of words, the participants are required to clarify and refract their arguments to crystal clarity and hopefully eliminate any extraneous material.  It seems to me 500 words, approx. 2 typed pages, should be sufficient to make ones point, but I am not stuck on a particular number though, simply having some limit to the length in which to make your argument.


[ Parent ]

Yes (none / 0) (#30)
by coljac on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 05:20:25 PM EST

This is of course my thinking as well. I'd like to have a story readable in a single sitting. It's especially important that the rebuttals are limited so that the author has to think carefully and avoid diatribe.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey
[ Parent ]

Not so sure about that (none / 1) (#55)
by ffrinch on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 11:06:09 AM EST

Debaters should be concise, yes, but limiting their wordcounts too far will preclude most of the subtle/complex (and, IMO, interesting) arguments. There's only so much you can say in a short time, and debaters can't afford to ignore the strong, obvious arguments in favour of the others.

This will only be really valuable if it's a debate between two well-informed people who can offer arguments that the usual members of the peanut-gallery can't come up with on their own.

With short responses, I don't see that happening.

Just tell the debaters not to waffle, or use straw men etc., but don't limit them.

-◊-
"I learned the hard way that rock music ... is a powerful demonic force controlled by Satan." — Jack Chick
[ Parent ]

can we have a special section? (2.62 / 8) (#15)
by circletimessquare on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 03:56:53 PM EST

where i can just yell at people?

The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

To yell at people... (2.80 / 15) (#17)
by Psycho Dave on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 04:12:01 PM EST

...you'd need to learn how to use the <SHIFT> key.

BEYOTCH

[ Parent ]

ZZZZZING! [nt] (none / 0) (#53)
by alby on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 06:13:38 AM EST



[ Parent ]
We already have one (2.85 / 7) (#35)
by godix on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 09:27:27 PM EST

It's called the comments.

They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans, wonder why people thinks he hates America?
[ Parent ]
Point- Counterpoint (2.71 / 14) (#28)
by MichaelCrawford on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 05:03:49 PM EST

"Jane, you ignorant slut."

Need I say more?


-- Could you use my embedded systems development services?


eh? (none / 0) (#88)
by niku on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 04:22:04 AM EST

Was that a kentuck fried movie reference? Nice.
--
Nicholas Bernstein, Technologist, artist, etc.
http://nicholasbernstein.com
[ Parent ]
Saturday Night Live actually (none / 0) (#90)
by MichaelCrawford on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 12:17:30 PM EST

They would have a skit with a man and a woman acting out a televised debate. The woman would present her case in a thoughtful, rational fashion, and then the man would reply "Jane, you ignorant slut" and proceed to tear down her character.


-- Could you use my embedded systems development services?


[ Parent ]

Debate? (none / 2) (#32)
by Hide Teh Hamster on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 08:19:23 PM EST

You want real Debate? Watch the British House of Commons. That shit rocks.


This revitalised kuro5hin thing, it reminds me very much of the new German Weimar Republic. Please don't let the dark cloud of National Socialism descend upon it again.
Only interesting if debating for pinks. (none / 1) (#34)
by qpt on Fri Jul 02, 2004 at 09:25:05 PM EST


Domine Deus, creator coeli et terrae respice humilitatem nostram.

Rule #1 of K5 (none / 1) (#44)
by ljj on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 02:48:00 PM EST

You do not post meta stories on K5.

Only kidding. +1 for the idea.

--
ljj

The Topics (2.25 / 4) (#45)
by WorkingEmail on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 02:54:35 PM EST

Everyone should learn English. ... If they want to talk to participate in English-centric systems.

Faith is a valid source of knowledge. - If you don't trust anything, you can't know anything. Everyone got faith.

The US was right to invade Iraq. - This might make a good topic, once we have a clear view of what kind of 'right' is under discussion.

There is no such thing as "global warming". - No informed person would debate against this. A more interesting debate is whether the humans are causing significant global warming.

The government should fund alternative medicine. There are a LOT of alternative medicines. Think about every proposed medicine which is not in regular use by doctors (leeches, for example). Probably you should be more specific on this one.

Humanity needs one world government. - Good.


thanks ;) /mt (none / 1) (#62)
by kpaul on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 09:50:32 PM EST


2014 Halloween Costumes
[ Parent ]
And why not? (none / 2) (#69)
by kurtmweber on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 04:03:20 AM EST

There is no such thing as "global warming". - No informed person would debate against this.
The only reason I can think of why that might be true is because all the supposed "evidence" for it is so ludicrous that it's not worth wasting one's time on. Other than that, though, I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to point out how seriously wrong this piece of alarmist junk-science is. The only reason it's lasted so long is because threat of catastrophe gives government a convenient excuse for expanding beyond its objectively proper boundaries.

Kurt Weber
Any field of study can be considered 'complex' when it starts using Hebrew letters for symbols.--me
[ Parent ]
re: global warming (none / 1) (#70)
by WorkingEmail on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 04:45:53 AM EST

Ah. Whoops. To be more clear, I meant to say that "No informed person would debate against global warming." I committed some sort of double negative = negative thinking in my mind and didn't even notice.

There is plenty of evidence that the Earth's mean global temperature rises and falls over the centuries. As a quick guess, the variance periods for the mean global temperature are:

  • Days - exposures of high-albedo and low-albedo landmasses as earth rotates. Probably too quick to measure.
  • Years - axis shifts exposing north or south hemisphere, orbital eccentricity. Perhaps measurable.
  • Decades - sunspot cycle - very probably measurable.
  • Centuries - long-term variance in sunspot cycle or volcanoes or something else (?)
  • Longer - ice ages, etc.
Global warming and cooling is natural.


[ Parent ]
this should get its own section (2.71 / 7) (#46)
by momocrome on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 03:41:36 PM EST

Because of the varied topics sure to find representation in the debate format, it is imperitive that the format be granted its own Section, as opposed to Topic, that the content be accessible and neatly presented, which would include granting each debate an appropriate Topic tag to match the topic under debate.  

Those of you that agree might consider naming such a section 'Debates', but i strongly feel that it should be called 'Forensics', not least because it is a name that has the potential to confuse or mislead the ignorant into learning a smidge, but also because it is more specifically appropriate to what coljac is proposing.

The descriptive text in the section title bar might contain the definition of 'forensics'.  American Heritage has it defined as:

fo·ren·sics
n. (used with a sing. verb)
  1. The art or study of formal debate; argumentation.

One objection I can forsee is the complaint that the Sections bar across the top of each page at kuro5hin.org is already looking a little crowded. Cramming another section in there might just crowd the thing into an eyesore, overwrought clutter added to an already busy layout. I feel this would be true. As a solution, I say we fold the 'Media' section into 'Culture', those two being nearly the same thing these days, and generally underepresented in the submission queue.

"Give a wide berth to all that foam and spray." - - Lucian, The Way to Write History

Name for the new section (none / 1) (#80)
by adimovk5 on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 05:34:10 PM EST

We could call the new section "D" on the title bar as in Big D for Debates. The subtitle would be taken from this story:

k5 Debate ........ (capital-D, not the everyday enlightened discussion )

[ Parent ]

A few topics (2.77 / 9) (#47)
by godix on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 04:21:32 PM EST

Try not to use the common K5 topics of Iraq, Bush/Kerry, or Moore. Instead I'd like to see things that aren't often talked about here.
  • The EU, the greatest thing to ever hit Europe or bloated burocratic monstrosity?
  • Sudan and other third world hellholes, WTF can be done?
  • Alternative mediasites (K5, dailykos, Indymedia, etc), boon or bullshit?
  • Regular news media, boon or bullshit?
  • Spaceflight, manned or robot?
  • CTS, can he be trained to use the shift key?


They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans, wonder why people thinks he hates America?
CTS (3.00 / 6) (#48)
by The Solitaire on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 09:16:45 PM EST

I, for one, think that CTS uses the shift key all the time! He just happens to have caps-lock on.

I need a new sig.
[ Parent ]

Well that's one side taken care of (none / 1) (#51)
by godix on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 02:17:20 AM EST

Anyone care to debate for the other side with The Solitaire?

They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans, wonder why people thinks he hates America?
[ Parent ]
me me :P -nt (none / 1) (#63)
by Kasreyn on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 12:45:24 AM EST

nt
"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
hi, (2.50 / 4) (#50)
by reklaw on Sat Jul 03, 2004 at 09:54:14 PM EST

  • greatest thing ever
  • nothing
  • bullshit
  • bullshit
  • manned
  • no
I think I've saved us all some trouble there.
-
[ Parent ]
Fantastic! (none / 1) (#56)
by squigly on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 01:46:08 PM EST

I for ne, think that reklaw should have his own section.

[ Parent ]
I'd like to debate you. Robotic > manned. (2.75 / 4) (#65)
by Kasreyn on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 12:49:08 AM EST

Spaceflight is expensive. Commercial viability is still a ways off. Since it's being funded publically, the public deserves the maximum return on this investment. Robotic missions are more cost-effective since they don't have to carry along life support for a few human meatbags, and they can take photos and collect samples just as well as a human can. Most of our discoveries about space, and most of the important ones, have been made by unmanned missions, a great deal of them by a single mission, Hubble.

Manned missions are good only to get glossy photos in Time Magazine. I don't see where that helps the public who funded the flights any.

There is also, of course, the risk of the deaths of the astronauts in a manned flight to consider.


-Kasreyn


"Extenuating circumstance to be mentioned on Judgement Day:
We never asked to be born in the first place."

R.I.P. Kurt. You will be missed.
[ Parent ]
yes and no (2.75 / 4) (#67)
by reklaw on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 01:37:08 AM EST

If you're flying to some distant planet to collect soil samples or take readings or whatever, then robotic is the way to go. However, robotic space flights, while they might be nice as a (very expensive) form of research, don't get you and me any closer to going into space. It's manned space flight that's going to get us closer to the commercial-space-flights goal -- hence all the excitement surrounding SpaceShipOne, for example.

Robotic flights are for research. Manned flights get us closer to space.
-
[ Parent ]

Development ... (none / 1) (#73)
by alby on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 06:31:32 AM EST

Going to the moon didn't actually accomplish much (other than winning the "Space Race"). It's the developments that were made in the course of doing so that were the real benefit.

Which is likely to yield the greater benefit, manned or robotic? Obviously there will be common areas but personally I can't decide between the two.

--
Alby
[ Parent ]

Hubble (none / 0) (#83)
by WorkingEmail on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 06:22:20 PM EST

Hubble was actually kinda both manned and robotic. Over the years, a serious amount of maintenance and upgrade had to be performed by humans, yet for most of the time, it was indeed a robotic mission.


[ Parent ]
I agree (none / 0) (#94)
by godix on Thu Jul 08, 2004 at 10:29:47 AM EST

A lot was learned when spaceflight still started and humans needed to figure out how to put a man in space but after that point any real scientific benefit has come from unmanned. However manned does have one benefit I think you're ignoring, it's a great PR move. Most people wouldn't be interested in space and wouldn't support spending money on space except that it provides them a pretty picture for their background and the occasional movie of the week about some good old boy who became an astronaut. As long as manned spaceflight can provide those two things the public supports spaceflight in general and doesn't notice the money spent for scientificly useful missions that don't provide pretty pictures.

They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans
[ Parent ]
Counterstrike ?! (none / 0) (#74)
by Highlander on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 07:19:27 AM EST

I use the shift key in counterstrike all the time. Always cool to keep a low profile.

And who is the "he" who you want to train ?

Moderation in moderation is a good thing.
[ Parent ]

CTS = circletimessquare <nt> (none / 1) (#84)
by godix on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 06:28:41 PM EST



They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet...
- Michael Moore describing Americans
[ Parent ]
CTS = crap typing script (ntjd) (none / 0) (#95)
by Wah on Thu Jul 08, 2004 at 11:33:12 AM EST

--
--
umm, holding, holding...
[ Parent ]
An excellant idea (none / 2) (#54)
by ageing hippie on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 08:50:42 AM EST

I agree with other comments that it would need it's own section
------------------------
Fool me once shame on you, Fool me twice shame on me
Why add more complexity to K5? (none / 1) (#57)
by theboz on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 03:22:19 PM EST

I guess I don't understand what purpose adding those arbitrary rules to a K5 discussion would serve?

Stuff.

well, theboz, i'm glad you asked! (none / 0) (#68)
by rmg on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 01:59:36 AM EST

for a long time now, k5 discussions have been nothing but bullshit. no facts, all opinion, all about matters of belief, and rhetorical tactics that would make a grade schooler blush.

this would present kuro5hin readers with an elevated standard of discourse on a regular basis, which could somehow rub off on them. the result would be a userbase familiar with basic logical and rhetorical principles (i.e. one a hell of a lot better than the current one). it would emphatically reassert the goals and founding ideals of kuro5hin.

of course, it will not go this way. people will find it pretentious, incoherent, and overly controversial. pretentious in that debates will have to be written economically and forcefully (which will make them feel inadequate -- they hate anything that's done well), incoherent in that the back and forth does not lead to a certain conclusion and may be hard to follow, and controversial in that any time an issue is explored from two opposing positions, people will certainly see a side of it they don't like.

but hey, it's such a good idea, i think we should all throw our support behind it! i mean, not so much support that we'll add anything of substance to the site over it, but enough so that no one can say we were against it. then when it fails, we'll at least be able to say it wasn't our fault.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

counterpoint: (none / 1) (#82)
by gzt on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 06:15:58 PM EST

I don't value K5 enough to take the time to write out a good fact-filled response. I'd rather point to an argument which suggests an answer but is by no means conclusive. Besides, to do a good debate, one must be thoroughly familiar with the issues and have cases prepared for both sides of the resolution. Is anybody going to make those preparations for K5?

[ Parent ]
lack of time or expertise (none / 0) (#86)
by adimovk5 on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 07:29:53 PM EST

Those without the time, patience, expertise or desire to be a debater could contribute ideas or help in other ways if the constuction of the arguments is open in the edit queue.

[ Parent ]
history tells us 'no.' (none / 0) (#87)
by rmg on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 03:26:55 AM EST

there is little in recent k5 history to suggest that anyone cares enough to participate in the rigors of debate -- certainly, not in good faith.

on the other hand, i'd be delighted to hold troll debates similar to what you propose in your toplevel comment. the freedom to substitute creativity for facts would go along way for me.

_____

stalinism

dave dean
[ Parent ]

Now that I actually read your comment... (none / 0) (#89)
by gzt on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 11:11:25 AM EST

...I see that you were agreeing with me. I should know better than to respond to an RMG Brand Comment [tm] without having read it, especially if I propose to offer a Sensible and Well-Reasoned [tm] response.

[ Parent ]
you know I've been (none / 0) (#97)
by William Shakespeare on Thu Apr 21, 2005 at 04:33:32 AM EST

wondering if i bury a whole lot of comments in really old stories if in fact anyone will find them?

[ Parent ]
Biased Debates (none / 1) (#58)
by cronian on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 04:08:15 PM EST

The whole concept of having an Affirmative and Negative side of the debat, makes the entire debate biased. Debate topics can inherently end with things like shoud we torture them or kill them.

What exactly does winning a debate mean? Is whoever can think of more crap to say? I think this whole format leads to especially narrow-minded debates, and discussion.

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
in theory, no (none / 1) (#60)
by livus on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 06:37:14 PM EST

because a debate topic does not take the form of a question.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
not neccessarily the topic (none / 1) (#64)
by cronian on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 12:48:46 AM EST

The debate topic may be ok, but how you define the two sides. What does the affirmative side mean? In this system you inherently have to set up both people with some sort of position or else they may not be able to disagree on anything. Bipolar debates are a call for stupidty.

We perfect it; Congress kills it; They make it; We Import it; It must be anti-Americanism
[ Parent ]
the affirmative side means the topic (none / 2) (#72)
by livus on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 05:44:19 AM EST

the other side means anything it wants as long as it goes against the topic.

---
HIREZ substitute.
be concrete asshole, or shut up. - CTS
I guess I skipped school or something to drink on the internet? - lonelyhobo
I'd like to hope that any impression you got about us from internet forums was incorrect. - debillitatus
I consider myself trolled more or less just by visiting the site. HollyHopDrive

[ Parent ]
I have an even better idea (none / 2) (#59)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 04:27:04 PM EST

This format is too limiting.  Other people besides the two oppenents might have something to say.

I think anyone who wants to should be allowed to contribute to the debate, after all, another person might have a unique perspective or information that the principle debaters don't have.  This doesn't work in real life because people talk over each other but it will work here with a system of nested replies to comments.

Furthermore, I don't think the debate needs an offical ending.  I think people should keep replying as long as they have something to say.  Otherwise, you know people will just lie in replies that can't be rebutted.

Also, instead of deciding the winner with a poll, K5ers can just rate individual comments.  Moderating is not anoymous so the system is less prone to abuse.  Also, you can isolate the parts of the debate that you like and say those are good.  While the debate won't have an offical winner, I don't think thats a big deal.  People would just vote for the person they agree with, not the best debater anyway.

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour

so (none / 0) (#76)
by ShiftyStoner on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 08:44:51 AM EST

 in other words, k5 is just fine the way it is?
( @ )'( @ ) The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force. - Adolf Hitler
[ Parent ]
You're very perceptive (none / 0) (#91)
by Big Sexxy Joe on Tue Jul 06, 2004 at 07:36:39 PM EST

yes

I'm like Jesus, only better.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free grassroots news hour
[ Parent ]
Better idea: Absurd debates. (2.25 / 4) (#61)
by gzt on Sun Jul 04, 2004 at 08:05:41 PM EST

Use a typical resolution and debate rules [policy or LD or whatever], but reward points based on absurdity and cleverness of arguments. Frankly, I don't want to hear anybody's real arguments school vouchers; there's a reason I quit debate [actually, it was because I was too slow for LD, which is damn slow].

Anyways, -1 Article.

Yeah! (none / 2) (#71)
by WorkingEmail on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 04:47:55 AM EST

And we could have Bonus and Lightning rounds.

And we would call the debators 'contestants'.

Maybe we could make a reality show out of it. :)


[ Parent ]

hmm (none / 1) (#75)
by ShiftyStoner on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 08:18:30 AM EST

 How about right now, as soon as you read this you make a diary chalenging a list of people to a debate.

 Somone excepts the chalenge.

 Ask the person if they would like to be affirmitive or negative.

 Then you chose a topic right 600 words on it make it a diary. You and the chalenger would simpley have to ignore any idiots.

 The chalenger makes a 600 word coment. You make a 400 word coment. They make a 400 word comment etc. I say fuck wating a weak, try getting it done before the diary leves the page, but u 2 could decide however fucking long you wana take.

 Then when done you edit it and throw it into vote with a poll that has both of your names explaining to people its not a popularity contest not a matter of your opinion on the topic but to vote for who they think won the debate.

 So get on it. And anyone else who thinks this is a good idea get on it as well, making your own diary chalenging somone to a debate.

 I dont see the point in puting this on the front page. You shoulda just done what i said in the first place. Then had the debate on here now.

( @ )'( @ ) The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force. - Adolf Hitler

"Manned space flight must continue." (2.66 / 6) (#77)
by coljac on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 12:46:36 PM EST

A great write in candidate from godix, and one that I think would interest many on k5. If you like this topic more than the others, please reply or rate this comment. If you'd like to participate in a debate on this topic, let me know. I'm excited about this one.

Otherwise, the poll favors the World Government topic, let me know if you want to take a position on that too.



---
Whether or not life is discovered there I think Jupiter should be declared an enemy planet. - Jack Handey

More (none / 0) (#79)
by Ward57 on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 03:29:36 PM EST

Discourse. Should it always be civil, or are there times when only profanity accurately expresses a certain point of view? Man. Primarily animal, or primarily higher being? Sex. Digusting animalism or pleasant recreation? (I'm assuming christianity comes down on the animal side, but maybee it doesn't.)

My POV (none / 0) (#81)
by WorkingEmail on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 06:07:37 PM EST

All pleasant recreations are also disgusting animalisms. :)


[ Parent ]
wrong on christianity (none / 0) (#96)
by Pike on Tue Jul 13, 2004 at 05:42:35 PM EST

"(I'm assuming christianity comes down on the animal side, but maybee it doesn't.)"
Nope, it doesn't. Where do you get an idea like that?

[ Parent ]
Suggestions for your Debate format (none / 1) (#85)
by adimovk5 on Mon Jul 05, 2004 at 07:24:44 PM EST

Suggestions for your Debate format

  1. There should be a section called "k5 Debates". We could call the new section "D" on the title bar as in Big D for Debates. The subtitle would be taken from this coljac story: k5 Debate ........ (capital-D, not the everyday enlightened discussion )

  2. Articles should be moderated within the k5 system. A person wishing people to debate on a subject should post a story to the edit queue in the following format:

    • Title - Moderating (Round ?): Humanity needs one world government.

      The title will change during the debate.

      Moderating (Round 1): - call for arguments
      Moderating (Round 2): - call for responses
      Moderating (Round 3): - call for conclusions

    • Intro - I wish to moderate a debate concerning one world government. Please post a story to the edit queue if you are interested in leading the affirmative or the negative. Teams have one week to complete their argument. Post your story with one of the following titles:
      Argument For: Humanity needs one world government.

      Argument Against: Humantity does not need one world government.

      These are the rules for the debate:

      • Anyone may volunteer to be a lead debater.
      • The lead debater will post a story to the edit queue.
      • The lead debater will lead a debate team.
      • Commenters to each side will help the lead debater build his 600 word case.
      • The case will be in the body of his story.
      • Each round is limited to one week.
      • More than one person can attempt to build a team and an argument.

    • Body - The moderator will choose the best argument from each side and post it in the body of his story. New stories should then be posted beginning with "Response For" and "Response Against" in which each side will respond to the arguments of the other side with a limit of 600 words using the same format. No new arguments may be added in the second round. A third round will conclude the debate. The titles of third round stories will be "Conclusion For" and "Conclusion Against". At the end of each round, teams will remove their stories from the edit queue.

  3. The completed debate

    Upon completion of the third round, the moderator will remove his story from the queue and repost it as a new story (to clear the old comments). Lead debaters will remove their stories from the edit queue.

    • Title - Debate: Humanity needs one world government.

    • Intro - Proposed, Humanity needs one world government. Recognition for all lead contributors is the responsibility of the Moderator. Recognition for all subcontributors is the responsibility of the lead debaters within the body of their work.

    • Body - The story itself will contain the debate.

      • argument for
      • argument against
      • response for
      • response against
      • conclusion for
      • conclusion against

    • Poll - A poll should be included.
      • For wins
      • Against wins
      • Draw
      • Abstain

  4. Concurring and Dissenting

    The community can argue the merits of each side and have the usual fun. This includes the re-introduction of concurring and dissenting opinions of the original debate that will be lost when the working debate teams are dumped from the queue. People who felt their arguments were stronger can add them as comments.



The K5 Debates | 97 comments (85 topical, 12 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!