Pudding Time
Banned
ok found my post.. guess it was because the posts from and earlier date were moved in here..
Discussion About OTz Team Debates
- Thread starter debbie t
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
144Replies
-
2KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Pudding Time
Banned
This sounds like a great idea,count me in
Just a question on it all,would it be a case of each team member posting a piece of under say X number of words and the team discussing who would deal with which aspect of a particular arguement and each post their piece.then when the initial posts are in each team has a chance to reply to the points the opposition has raised?
I think that way would eliminate a lot of duplication of answers.
Just a question on it all,would it be a case of each team member posting a piece of under say X number of words and the team discussing who would deal with which aspect of a particular arguement and each post their piece.then when the initial posts are in each team has a chance to reply to the points the opposition has raised?
I think that way would eliminate a lot of duplication of answers.
Pudding Time
Banned
OK. Here's my take on these team debates.
Team Debate Forum
It would be nice to have a forum created under this one "Philosophy & Debate", called "Offtopicz Team Debate". Although it's possible to use this forum, it would be nice to organize it this way.
Topic Selection
In the new forum, there should be a sticky thread made called "Topic Selection". In this thread people can discuss what topics they would like to see debated. If 3 requests are made for a particular topic, then a mod can grant the requests and create a debate thread for the requested topic.
Team Selection
Once the debate thread has been created, the team selection process begins. The first 3 people to post either "For" or "Against" in regards to the selected topic, are chosen for the respective teams. Once teams are formed, the team members are required to select a team captain. The soul purpose of the team captain is to be the team member who posts the team's arguments. After the team selection process has finalized, moderators should then delete the team selection posts, and declare the debate open.
3 people seem like the better number of people per team, in my opinion. This will allow team to unanimously agree much easier on the argument to be present. Also the collaboration of facts gathered will be much easier to organize. All this will allow for greater flow of the debate process.
The Debate Process
Arguments should be turn based, meaning one team posts their argument, then the other team posts theirs, and so on. Posts are only made by the elected team captain. If the team captain is unable to make the post, both the moderator, and the opposing team captain needs to be notified outside the debate thread. Once notification is acknowledged, the team can then decide on it's own for either a temporary or replacement captain.
There should be a limit of posts before the debate comes to an end. Using the number of posts limit system rather than a time limit system, let's teams know exactly when the debate will come to an end. Therefore teams can organize to present all their arguments before the debate is over. The exact number of posts to limit a debate should be agreed upon when the topic is requested. The difference in post limits may be needed since not all topics will warrant the same amount of arguments needed to convey a teams overall argument.
If a team can not form an argument, that team is required to formally withdraw from the debate. If a team does not make a post within 48 hours of either the opening of the debate, or the last post made by the opposing team, then that team will be automatically withdrawn from the debate. The end of the debate should be left as is, and no winner should be declared. Disputes over debate outcomes will ruin the concept.
Only thing I'm not sure on is how to decide which team posts their argument first.
Team Debate Forum
It would be nice to have a forum created under this one "Philosophy & Debate", called "Offtopicz Team Debate". Although it's possible to use this forum, it would be nice to organize it this way.
Topic Selection
In the new forum, there should be a sticky thread made called "Topic Selection". In this thread people can discuss what topics they would like to see debated. If 3 requests are made for a particular topic, then a mod can grant the requests and create a debate thread for the requested topic.
Team Selection
Once the debate thread has been created, the team selection process begins. The first 3 people to post either "For" or "Against" in regards to the selected topic, are chosen for the respective teams. Once teams are formed, the team members are required to select a team captain. The soul purpose of the team captain is to be the team member who posts the team's arguments. After the team selection process has finalized, moderators should then delete the team selection posts, and declare the debate open.
3 people seem like the better number of people per team, in my opinion. This will allow team to unanimously agree much easier on the argument to be present. Also the collaboration of facts gathered will be much easier to organize. All this will allow for greater flow of the debate process.
The Debate Process
Arguments should be turn based, meaning one team posts their argument, then the other team posts theirs, and so on. Posts are only made by the elected team captain. If the team captain is unable to make the post, both the moderator, and the opposing team captain needs to be notified outside the debate thread. Once notification is acknowledged, the team can then decide on it's own for either a temporary or replacement captain.
There should be a limit of posts before the debate comes to an end. Using the number of posts limit system rather than a time limit system, let's teams know exactly when the debate will come to an end. Therefore teams can organize to present all their arguments before the debate is over. The exact number of posts to limit a debate should be agreed upon when the topic is requested. The difference in post limits may be needed since not all topics will warrant the same amount of arguments needed to convey a teams overall argument.
If a team can not form an argument, that team is required to formally withdraw from the debate. If a team does not make a post within 48 hours of either the opening of the debate, or the last post made by the opposing team, then that team will be automatically withdrawn from the debate. The end of the debate should be left as is, and no winner should be declared. Disputes over debate outcomes will ruin the concept.
Only thing I'm not sure on is how to decide which team posts their argument first.
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
I was on debate team in high school .. you don't always get the side you want .. you just have to win.
And unless someone else here is skilled in debating (on a serious level) .. then I don't see this working .. the peopel who judge debates (like in high school) have a certain set of rules they abide by and a scoring system as well.
Being on a debate team isn't about debating your own personal beliefs .. it's about debating the side of the issue you are given.
I was on debate team in high school .. you don't always get the side you want .. you just have to win.
And unless someone else here is skilled in debating (on a serious level) .. then I don't see this working .. the peopel who judge debates (like in high school) have a certain set of rules they abide by and a scoring system as well.
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
This sounds like a great idea,count me in
Just a question on it all,would it be a case of each team member posting a piece of under say X number of words and the team discussing who would deal with which aspect of a particular arguement and each post their piece.then when the initial posts are in each team has a chance to reply to the points the opposition has raised?
I think that way would eliminate a lot of duplication of answers.
The way I am seeing it is that it is fluent as in typical debates here. Limitations and the like may kill the spirit. Debaters may want to support their argument with supporting data as well. That's cool.
Thing is too everyone's time is different according to their schedule so trying to structure responses waiting for another to reply may not work well. You don't want to put unnecessary pressure on participants with responding by X time. May not be realistic timewise. Let team members respond as they naturally do bearing in mind with 5 per team there's enough of a filler for participation/interjection. Fluent sporadic debate. Only difference being position to best persuade your point of view and the time period per duration of debate. Perhaps 1 week may be a better duration, coming to think of it. Sufficient time for research (if need be) and exchanges without getting too drawn out.
What I can do, if ok, is perhaps draft up the way it would work outlining the principles and understanding re: amount per team, time period, subject matter and whatever pertinent so that we could have a clear understanding...the mechanics really... in one draft post and move on from there with the intent to get the show going.
I will ask for member's submissions for potential interesting topics for debate also. That should be interesting. I can draft this up perhaps to present by the end of this week (There's no rush to have this start this tomorrow). It could start by next week or so. No biggy.
Pudding Time
Banned
Pudding Time
Banned
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
I'm the same. If I were on a team which had to prove why god does indeed exist, I would be completely useless to the team.
I'd like to this but this would be my problem. I honestly couldn't debate for something I disagree with, I'd be the Winston Churchill of this!
I'm the same. If I were on a team which had to prove why god does indeed exist, I would be completely useless to the team.
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
And what exactly is the point in having a debate team if there is no winner .. the debate has to eventually come to an end .. and to do that .. there has to be a defined winner of said debate.
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
This is the thing about debates, which has been proved too often here. There are cases put side from both sides and the best that usually happens is we agree to disagree. Just because someone has been judged to win the argument dosent mean the opposition will change their mind on it. Kind of pointless, it's just nice discussing different points of view.
This is the thing about debates, which has been proved too often here. There are cases put side from both sides and the best that usually happens is we agree to disagree. Just because someone has been judged to win the argument dosent mean the opposition will change their mind on it. Kind of pointless, it's just nice discussing different points of view.
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
That isn't the "point" of a "real" debate .. the point is for both sides to come out with guns firing .. with facts (not assumptions) and after a said amount of time the scores are tallied and the winner is decided .. no one has to agree with anything.
It's kinda like boxing (the scoring part).
Most of the time when a debate team is debating .. most of the members don't even agree with the side of the issue with which they have been assigned .. that's what proves if you have real skill or not .. when you can win a debate on something you are against.
This is the thing about debates, which has been proved too often here. There are cases put side from both sides and the best that usually happens is we agree to disagree. Just because someone has been judged to win the argument dosent mean the opposition will change their mind on it. Kind of pointless, it's just nice discussing different points of view.
That isn't the "point" of a "real" debate .. the point is for both sides to come out with guns firing .. with facts (not assumptions) and after a said amount of time the scores are tallied and the winner is decided .. no one has to agree with anything.
It's kinda like boxing (the scoring part).
Most of the time when a debate team is debating .. most of the members don't even agree with the side of the issue with which they have been assigned .. that's what proves if you have real skill or not .. when you can win a debate on something you are against.
Pudding Time
Banned
Actually I think that it is necessary to proclaim a winner on the basis of the arguements and responses/rebuttals of the other team's arguements. If theres a debate and there are several interested posters who dont want to post on any side of a topic then leave them judge the debate on the strength of the points the teams make and their rebuttals of the other team's arguements.
Personally though I think that politics and religion should not be among the subjects being debated.
Just let people submit topics and when there is a list of 5 to 10 topics ,number them alphabetically and leave the non-debaters hold a poll to choose the topics.It gives everybody more of an interest even if they arent debating.
Personally though I think that politics and religion should not be among the subjects being debated.
Just let people submit topics and when there is a list of 5 to 10 topics ,number them alphabetically and leave the non-debaters hold a poll to choose the topics.It gives everybody more of an interest even if they arent debating.
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
"real" debates are never on such issues .. politics and religion are not allowed .. the subject is to vast for there to ever to be a clear outcome.
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
This is exactly the concept as I was envisaging. This is the "out of the box" as opposed to one's own set mindframe depending on the topic. This is the task. Not to say that one may not happen to get a subject that is what one already believes in but you never know what card you may be dealt and that's the fun part. Luck of the draw.
What I would like to see (my opinion) is that the process NOT to be bogged down with time limitations for replying and the like. Realistically speaking, unless one is on vacation or not working, we post on the forum as time permits during the work week. Neither introducing points (scoring), declaring winners and the like that would cause unnecessary hurt feelings etc., but rather something that does not make participation too tedious. It ought to be fluent/sporadic/spontaneous as time permits yet healthy interesting debate pretty much as naturally occurs.
This is exactly the concept as I was envisaging. This is the "out of the box" as opposed to one's own set mindframe depending on the topic. This is the task. Not to say that one may not happen to get a subject that is what one already believes in but you never know what card you may be dealt and that's the fun part. Luck of the draw.
What I would like to see (my opinion) is that the process NOT to be bogged down with time limitations for replying and the like. Realistically speaking, unless one is on vacation or not working, we post on the forum as time permits during the work week. Neither introducing points (scoring), declaring winners and the like that would cause unnecessary hurt feelings etc., but rather something that does not make participation too tedious. It ought to be fluent/sporadic/spontaneous as time permits yet healthy interesting debate pretty much as naturally occurs.
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
You can have a time limit and not be bogged down (it's eventually got to come to an end or else it will go on forever .. just like some threads we have here) .. you can give it a week or 2 weeks or a month .. that's plenty of time to gather your info and post your peace.
You can have a time limit and not be bogged down (it's eventually got to come to an end or else it will go on forever .. just like some threads we have here) .. you can give it a week or 2 weeks or a month .. that's plenty of time to gather your info and post your peace.
Peter Parka
Well-Known Member
I think I'd have to give this a miss then. Whatever you think, I have my opinions and I can't argue for something I think is wrong, I'd be a shit lawyer! Good luck to everyone in this though!
Good luck to everyone in this though!I think that captains posting the initial posts of each team member and naming the team member is a good idea to begin with,it also allows everybody to get a feel for where everybody stands when it comes to debating skills and will make for more even teams in the future.
I also think that each team member should be limited to 3 posts in the debate apart from their opening statements.,one for countering/disproving another team's arguement,one for defending their own points that they make,and a final general summing up of their strengths and the oppositions weaknesses in the arguements.
I also think that each team member should be limited to 3 posts in the debate apart from their opening statements.,one for countering/disproving another team's arguement,one for defending their own points that they make,and a final general summing up of their strengths and the oppositions weaknesses in the arguements.
COOL_BREEZE2
Well-Known Member
Re: The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
There is a time limit per debate. Maybe you missed it earlier. The time limit per topic debate, lets say, maybe be 1 week. During the course of that debate week, team members (For and Against) express their points of view accordingly. At the stated end of the debate period the debate ends and another one follows etc.
Teams are picked and topic provided for debate to begin on stated date through to end of debate.
There is a time limit per debate. Maybe you missed it earlier. The time limit per topic debate, lets say, maybe be 1 week. During the course of that debate week, team members (For and Against) express their points of view accordingly. At the stated end of the debate period the debate ends and another one follows etc.
Teams are picked and topic provided for debate to begin on stated date through to end of debate.
78,875Threads
2,185,391Messages
4,959Members