Sideline thread for debate conversations...

[hart]

Congrats Zirc and Retro!!!

 

[retro]

Thanks for all of the votes guys

Cam --- great debate, I thoroughly enjoyed sparring with you.

So Sam, does this mean that Zirc and I get a break during the tie-breaker?

 

[USF Sam]

Thanks for all of the votes guys

Cam --- great debate, I thoroughly enjoyed sparring with you.

So Sam, does this mean that Zirc and I get a break during the tie-breaker?

That is correct... consider it a first-round bye... just in the second round.... sorta.

...


Yes, you'll be sitting on your asses until we've sorted out your competition. :surrender

 

[Leah Love]

Congrats zirc and retro! Well done!

HK, Red, Ed, Butterfly, good luck with the tie-beaker round

 

[USF Sam]

The tiebreaker rounds are up.

Red and Butterfly, the floors are yours.

 

[USF Sam]

Sooooo.... these topics a little meatier than "Who will be the next Britney?" ?

 

[edgray]

woah from 0 -100 mph there Sam, from mindless pop culture right into the meat of it.

kinda feel I've quite a big disadvantage here.

 

[HK]

Just out of interest, is whoever gets to post first a random choice? I only ask because I already know what my actual position is on the issue you posted, but I'm almost 100% Red is going to take the same stance, which means I'm arguing against my own beliefs. That's fine, I know that happens in debate, but is it likely to get mixed up in the future?

 

[USF Sam]

Just out of interest, is whoever gets to post first a random choice? I only ask because I already know what my actual position is on the issue you posted, but I'm almost 100% Red is going to take the same stance, which means I'm arguing against my own beliefs. That's fine, I know that happens in debate, but is it likely to get mixed up in the future?

Yes, the rotation was decided by a literal flip of the coin.

It's true that sometimes you have to argue against what you personally believe. In some debates that I've been a part of the sides started the debate arguing one side and then half way thru were ordered to switch sides. The debaters were expected to argue both sides convincingly.

There is a ton of background on both topics available, so it shouldn't be that difficult to find enough material to build a case either direction. :nod:

Good luck! You did very well in the earlier round.

 

[HK]

Thank you I've reread the topic again and it's not as bad as I first thought, but boy did you bring out the big guns!

 

[USF Sam]

Thank you I've reread the topic again and it's not as bad as I first thought, but boy did you bring out the big guns!

Wait til you see the final topic.

 

[porterjack]

good stuff congrats to all

and looking forward to reading the new stuff, great subjects btw

 

[anathelia]

I wish I had been around and seen this going on. It would've been fun to participate! lol

 

[HottyToddyChick]

This round will be interesting. I know where I stand, so I'm curious to see if the arguments mean I'll vote that way, or if I'll wind up actually voting the other way.

 

[USF Sam]

I know what the last topic will be... but now I have to think up two new ones for the semis since these were supposed to be for that.

Personally, I'm glad that there was a tie. I wanted to see both of these pairs dive into something that had a bit more meat to it. As you can tell by the votes, everybody was impressed by the arguments made on both sides in those matches.

 

[edgray]

fucking bollocks question.

 

[retro]

fucking bollocks question.

but that's the beauty of debate

 

[USF Sam]

fucking bollocks question.

:24:

I'll take that as a funky kind of a compliment.

 

[edgray]

the only people I've ever heard saying it's murder are religious zealots totally disconnected from reality. There are many logical arguments against euthanasia, not one single coherent argument would ever use the word "murder".

 

[USF Sam]

the only people I've ever heard saying it's murder are religious zealots totally disconnected from reality. There are many logical arguments against euthanasia, not one single coherent argument would ever use the word "murder".

You don't have to use the term "murder". If I unwittingly restricted it to that, that is my mistake.

The question would be better asked as "Should euthanasia be legal?"

I will state this in the thread and give you both a chance to start over, if desired.