OTz Debate Tournament v2.7

R

retro

Well-Known Member
2 2 2 2 1
15 Year Club Well Known
So, I want to get the next round of the debate tournament up and running. I'll be handling this edition of the tournament so Sam will have the opportunity to participate if he so chooses.

I do have one very important caveat for those intending on participating. If you choose to participate, I need you all to also commit to reading the other debates and voting on them... for the entirety of the tournament, not just until you're eliminated. We ran into a serious issue with the last tournament where we had all of five people vote in the finals. That isn't fair to the people participating, so voting in the other debates is a requirement.

We'll start off with 8 participants, and I'll consider increasing that if we have enough interest. I'm also preemptively signing Ana up because I already asked her and she said she wanted to participate this time.

1. Ana
2. Zirc
3. Peter
4. Siph
5. Sam
6. Leah
7. HK
8.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think you should add a new 'allowance' to the rules of the tournament. At the end of the debates..... time should be given for other members to give their opinions on what they thought about certain points of the debate. Perhaps to enlighten other members on portions of the debate they may have overlooked or ignored. Sort of a "debate the debate points". It could be interesting and fun. Everyone could get involved and have a say that way.

Then let the voting commence. :D
 
RedRyder said:
I think you should add a new 'allowance' to the rules of the tournament. At the end of the debates..... time should be given for other members to give their opinions on what they thought about certain points of the debate. Perhaps to enlighten other members on portions of the debate they may have overlooked or ignored. Sort of a "debate the debate points". It could be interesting and fun. Everyone could get involved and have a say that way.
Click to expand...

I noticed some people just did that in their voting comment, that's why I liked seeing the comments afterwards - a lot of it was constructive stuff :)
 
HK said:
I noticed some people just did that in their voting comment, that's why I liked seeing the comments afterwards - a lot of it was constructive stuff :)
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. But I think it would be fun to 'debate' with the others right there in the thread. I mean.... I read some of the voters comments and would have liked to point things out to them where I felt they were too harsh or dead wrong or where I felt they had misinterpreted something said by the debaters.
 
RedRyder said:
I think you should add a new 'allowance' to the rules of the tournament. At the end of the debates..... time should be given for other members to give their opinions on what they thought about certain points of the debate. Perhaps to enlighten other members on portions of the debate they may have overlooked or ignored. Sort of a "debate the debate points". It could be interesting and fun. Everyone could get involved and have a say that way.

Then let the voting commence. :D
Click to expand...

In the debate tournament the debate is between two people - you have limited words and posts to express everything you wish to say, clear and to the point. That's the trick to it. If after the debate is concluded someone comes in and explains their standpoint again and enlightens other members how they misunderstood what they said, that would go against those rules, now wouldn't it?

Now, if the explanation happened AFTER the voting had been concluded that would make more sense. This, by the way, was an option all throughout the previous debate tournament.
 
Leah Love said:
In the debate tournament the debate is between two people - you have limited words and posts to express everything you wish to say, clear and to the point. That's the trick to it. If after the debate is concluded someone comes in and explains their standpoint again and enlightens other members how they misunderstood what they said, that would go against those rules, now wouldn't it?
Click to expand...
That's why I'm suggesting new rules from the get go. :D

To add a twist to the debate threads. Allowing other members to pick and choose what they liked or didn't like about the debate. Perhaps inspiring others to rethink whom they might vote for and why. I suppose I didn't say that the original debaters would not be allowed to debate with the members who hold the discussion once the debate is over. After all.... They already had their chance.

Now, if the explanation happened AFTER the voting had been concluded that would make more sense. This, by the way, was an option all throughout the previous debate tournament.
Click to expand...
No. The members would be able to express their opinions BEFORE the voting. I've stated why above.
 
RedRyder said:
That's why I'm suggesting new rules from the get go. :D

To add a twist to the debate threads. Allowing other members to pick and choose what they liked or didn't like about the debate. Perhaps inspiring others to rethink whom they might vote for and why. I suppose I didn't say that the original debaters would not be allowed to debate with the members who hold the discussion once the debate is over. After all.... They already had their chance.

No. The members would be able to express their opinions BEFORE the voting. I've stated why above.
Click to expand...
We had that sideline debate thread last time...:unsure:
 
zirconaz said:
Yes, it was USED. :D

(P.S. The word utilize drives me up the wall. If you continue to use it I will put you on ignore. :ninja)
Click to expand...

Bwahahahahahahaha..... I for one have never utilized the ignore button. I have also never wanted to drive anyone up a wall.... so I shall refrain from utilizing 'that' word once I submit this post. ;)
 
RedRyder said:
That's why I'm suggesting new rules from the get go. :D

To add a twist to the debate threads. Allowing other members to pick and choose what they liked or didn't like about the debate. Perhaps inspiring others to rethink whom they might vote for and why. I suppose I didn't say that the original debaters would not be allowed to debate with the members who hold the discussion once the debate is over. After all.... They already had their chance.

No. The members would be able to express their opinions BEFORE the voting. I've stated why above.
Click to expand...

The voters need to make their choice based on the posts of the two debaters, and not a third member's.
Surely it would be unfair towards the two debaters who had limited words and posts to defend their standpoints if someone came in who didn't have the same limitation and argued against them, especially if they are forbidden to defend themselves.

I strongly support the idea of other members engaging in the debate, pointing out things that had been overlooked or misinterpreted, but only after the voting has been concluded so as to not influence the other voters.
 
Back
Top