DWYP 1 Archieves ( Merged )

[The Mad Hatter]

Bible vs. History History
Evolution vs. Creationism Evolution
Immigration Stricter laws
Gay marriage For
Capital Punishment For

 

[Jake13]

Genetic Engineering: For
Open Borders: Against
Pro-life
Evolutionist
Gay Adoption: For

 

[Rici]

Same-Sex Parent Adoption: For
Capital Punishment: Against

But, just put me anywhere if needed.

 

[Rici]

Political views: I have almost no stance on anything.
Religious views: I'm essentially a very open minded atheist.
Music: Pretty much anything.

Are you from Switzerland? Nah, just kidding mate .

(fun fact: in Dutch we call it Zwitserland)

 

[F8AL]

I have a question: Since I'm only interested and signed up for one debate topic, what will happen if there is no opponent and I don't have more than one topic to debate on?
Will I be forced to pick another topic instead?

 

[cF=)]

I'm currently posting on a school's computer.

My hard drive has blown up yesterday when I tried to install a chemistry program using a Windows 3.11 wizard. Result: I won't be able to debate this weekend.

I'm extremely sad to leave this competition... However, I'll probably be able to read some of you guys topics when I'll reformat my comp.

Hope this turns out well

 

[Digital Watches]

Question: How are the rounds to advance in terms of topics? Eventually, despite the popularity of certain topics, there are going to be matchups derived from entirely different topics, or worse, two people arguing the same side on the same topic. How are the rounds to proceed? Will a new topic be chosen for them? Will there be a second-round signup? Sorry if this has already been explained, but I'm a little unclear.

 

[Kirye]

I have a question: Since I'm only interested and signed up for one debate topic, what will happen if there is no opponent and I don't have more than one topic to debate on?
Will I be forced to pick another topic instead?

Either that, or you'll be put in a topic at random depending on missing spots.

Btw guys, don't include me in the contest, unfortunately I have some major univ work to do, and I gotta go to Tijuana today and half of tomorrow so I won't have time for all of this.

-1 member, sorry. Good luck to you guys on the debate!

 

[Crimson King]

A. DOH, we want you in it. You have are one of the people I was expecting most out of.
B. Diapers, if you want we can work around some schedule you want to give us. I am sure your opponent has no issues.

 

[Crimson King]

Excellent question. Essentially, if all the choices a person picks has either no one in it, we'd have to move them to another category. I don't know if that will happen, but if it does, it's be really odd circumstances. Though, I think they topic you picked was fine.

Also, as of tomorrow at at 11 (the late deadline) I will be purging the Temp Debaters of all members not in the contest. Sorry guys, but I don't want any outside posting ruining the flow.

 

[ti83pop]

Guess I'll post here then go sign up.

Name: (boards)ti83pop;Balmung2;Ore_Al. (real)Justin
Politics: Democrat
Religion: Protestant Christian
Music: All, I love and appreciate any form. Orchestral, Pop, country, (mild) rock. The only kind I dislike are Heavy Rock (like, very heavy), and heavy rap (just vulgar, no music or sense). I do like most rap though.

Myself: Tennesse Democrat. One in a million. No offense though. I was broken-hearted when Harold Ford jr. lost (senate candidate). I also was against Bush from the begining. Not republicans alltogether, just Bush. But enough of that, I play video games, do have a wii, I play Alto Sax., I sing (not professionally though o.o), and I'm cool to get along with as long as we don't talk politics. I love discussing though. I can just be slightly irritable. But only if the other person is a complete jerk. Otherwise, I love intelligent discussion and am ready for this debate. Oh, and I main Falco. Then Luigi/Marth and wish I was good with samus. There.

 

[ti83pop]

War

1) Was the US Right in going to Iraq? (No)
4) Was the execution of Saddam Hussein just? (No...to an extent)
3) Was Operation Iraqi Freedom a Success? (No)


Religion
2) Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice (Pro-Choice)


I think I'm just realizing what I've gotten myself into...

EDIT: Changed something I decided on not doing.

 

[Hamsterpie]

This should be fun.
Name: Hamsterpie/ PIE/ Chris
Political views: Libertarian
Relegion: Spiritual Atheist
Music: Mostly Punk, but a wide variety of rock. (No emo or death metal)

 

[Hamsterpie]

Since i enjoy the art of debate so much, i will argue any stance on any point, even though they may not line up with my personal views. However, I would like to debate:

Pro-Life vs Pro-Choice
Immigration: Should US have Open Borders Yes
Bible vs. History
Evolution vs. Creationism
Prayer in Public Schools Should not be teacher or administrator led, but allowed to be practiced by students.

 

[psicicle]

Evolution vs. Creationism, evolution

Bible vs History, history

 

[DoH]

Ok, sounds good. I'll keep tabs on the threads and see where I'm needed.

I think we should have a topic with each judge's paradigms, so each debater knows where to take their arguments.

 

[Mediocre]

Question: How are the rounds to advance in terms of topics? Eventually, despite the popularity of certain topics, there are going to be matchups derived from entirely different topics, or worse, two people arguing the same side on the same topic. How are the rounds to proceed? Will a new topic be chosen for them? Will there be a second-round signup? Sorry if this has already been explained, but I'm a little unclear.

Well, CK has said that people can be assigned the opposite side of a topic if there are too many people on one side or the other.

I guess we'll be playing it by ear for future rounds of debating, but I'd doubt that we'd just randomly assign people to topics. I'm guessing we'll just let them figure out which topics they were both at least somewhat interested.

CK can either confirm or deny this, of course. Despite being a judge, I haven't really been involved in the setup so far, so this is nothing more than speculation on my part.

 

[Zephyr]

1. Iraqi Stability as Affected by the War in Iraq - What sides are there? What's the question? Is it which era was better, Pre-Hussein or Post-Hussein?

2. Is the Constitution too flexible? - No.

3. Prayer in Public Schools? - For.

4. Which religion should the U.S. be considered? - All.

5. Gay Marriage? - For.

I hope I don't suck. =/

 

[Sizzle]

Since no one will step up I'll do these two.

Evolution vs. Creationism
Bible vs History

 

[Crimson King]

Like, I said Medi, I really don't want you to get involved in any unnecessary work for yourself. Volunteering as the 3rd judge was more than we can ask, and as mods, I feel we should be doing a lot more.

As for the brackets, after the first round is done, I'll make the subsequent brackets for the following weekend. Topics will be chosen by both debaters suggesting a few categories. If there is a match, we go by that and we find a topic by it, etc. If none are the same, we can merge topics (since some debates will cover more than one spectrum if worded right) based on approval. Essentially, you won't debate something you don't know about, but you also make have a debate that you only are half prepared for (hence a week for research). I want this contest to make you expand your mind and opinions.

Did that make sense? I threw up and still am quite woozy. Just ask tomorrow if it didn't make sense.

Mediocre, PM me, ASAP. I'll explain the whole rule set and everything there, I just keep forgetting to PM you then I miss you on AIM.

 

[Crimson King]

I'm a bit shocked that not many standard debaters have applied for the contest. However, I may have to do some spring cleaning after the contest to weed out the non-participating people. (Not just in the contest, but overall in the room)

Also, we may have an uneven number and I see a debate that has 2 on one side, and one on the other. Out of curosity, would anyone be up for taking a 2-on-1 debate in a sense? I have plans on how it'd work. I just want opinions first.

 

[DoH]

In my high school debate career, we did 2 v 2 teams, but sometimes someone's partner wouldn't show up and they'd have to debate maverick. It's pretty fun.

Also there'd have to be rules, like the second affirmative would only be able to work off things the first affirmative have said, to prevent abuse from new arguments.

 

[Marthmaster92]

i'll take these two:

1rayer in Public Schools: for it.
2:Gay marriage: Should it be Legal: No.



lemme know when it starts.

 

[marthsword]

Question: Should our signatures be disabled in the debates?

Other Question: When will the contest start?

 

[Jazzy Jinx]

N o

 

[Rici]

Well, I honestly don't think it's necessary to make a whole new group just for the winner(s). It seems a little unneccesary. Maybe a little icon(and membership of the Debate Hall if a Temp. Deb wins), but nothing more.

A custom title and avatar is enough for me to do it, I need a new one .

 

[Zephyr]

Hmm...

Name: Ryan/Goldenmuffin/Guff/Zephyr/whatever you want to call me, I don't mind.
Political views: I have quite a few but don't devote myself to a single party. Might as well be flexible.
Religion: Agnostic/open-minded Lutheran Christian. I enjoy crushing people and overall doing God's will. If you got the reference in the last sentence, I will be very surprised.
Music: Anything if it pleases my ear, but mostly VG music, movie soundtracks and old school rock.

My name is Ryan and I am a 16 year old sophomore going to Westview High School. I live in San Diego, California or in your mind, whichever location happens to suit me best. My hobbies include smash, hosting smash tournies, playing the clarinet, doing awesome With Your Power contests on smashboards, going to church, bashing MMORPG's and basically doing whatever is awesome to me at the moment. I plan on majoring in Psychology, hopefully at UCSD or any other good school. I tend to be rather calm and open-minded when debating any topic, so I think that I may aquit myself well in this competition. Good luck to all debaters!

 

[demoncaterpie]

I'll take on the 2 on 1 thing.

 

[ti83pop]

I would like 2 on 2 debates. One v two....I dunnow. I wouldn't care for it, but others might. I wouldn't want to do it though.

EDIT: I just realized I will be very busy soon. I'm sorry to report but I can't make it. Ugh, maybe next time :-(.

 

[Crimson King]

Alright guys, I am giving a final 11 hour rush for admission closure. I had a busier than usual night and just got home. So by noon tomorrow my time, (it's one as I post this) I am shutting down the sign-ups.

EDIT: As it stands right now, we are at 29 participants (WAY above what I thought). Two new people were admitted to the temp group, but unless the sign up within an hour, we'll have an uneven line-up. I may just go ahead an give the lucky 29th person (not the 29th registered, I'll figure a way to do it) a bye and they just have to present an argument for judging as a practice of sorts. That would be the easiest as a 2v1 would screw up brackets.

 

[Zephyr]

You know, it strikes me that we might still be able to somehow manage Singles and Doubles...just tossing that thought out there. I'm sure you guys have talked that over already, but I thought it might do some good just in case...

 

[Crimson King]

The biggest problem with doubles, 2 people get eliminated per round instead of one. And we have to judge their work as one, not two separate people.

 

[Crimson King]

And admissions are officially closed. Thanks for all who participated. And later comers have until 6 pm today (central) to PM and by discretion I will add one more only.

I'll have the schedule about an hour after work tonight (say 8-9).

 

[Zephyr]

I don't see the problem with that...but I won't bother you about it, you've got better things to do with your time. It was just an idea.

 

[JTB]

I don't see the problem with that...but I won't bother you about it, you've got better things to do with your time. It was just an idea.

Ok, lets look at a possible situation if we have teams:

Person A presents an excellent argument, has plenty of evidence, and such. But the point is s/he has done their research and has shown it.

The opposing team presents a counter to Person A's argument, and it is as effective as Person A's argument.

Now, what if Person B (Person A's teammate) presents a very ineffective argument, which causes them to lose the debate? Should Person A be penalized because their teammate screwed up, although they did very well?

The only reason I say this is because this what exactly happened to me in high school during a team debate. I did research with my partner, and thought we were both ready. I presented my opening statement, then the opposing team presented a counter to that. Then my partner presents a very ineffective counter, which costed me the debate and the grade.

Single debates are alot better IMO, because you are responsible for the outcome of the debate, not someone else.

 

[Mediocre]

Single debates are alot better IMO, because you are responsible for the outcome of the debate, not someone else.

Not to mention that changing the format of the debate at this point in time would be way too much trouble.

Anyway, at least you knew your partner in real life, so you could influence their participation in the debate to some extent. If your partner fails to show up in an internet debate, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it.

 

[Zephyr]

I'm sorry, I don't think that I was clear on the subject. The idea I had in mind basically had each team collaborating within their own team, via PMs or AIM or some other form of communication. Everytime their opponents posted, they would put their heads together and see what could possibly counter the point and sending out a single member to post their collective thoughts on the matter. Now, if that person's teammate did in fact post without first consulting his partner, then I've gotta say, that really sucks, because it looks like he collaborated with his partner before posting when he actually did nothing of the sort. However, if it were established beforehand that each team was required to collaborate before posting, than that would eliminate that entire problem, wouldn't it?

The problem with your High School debate was that (I'm making an assumption here and saying that it is like my debates at my high school) it was very structured and did not allow for flexibility, whereas a debate on a forum where one does not have to post a response immediately allows for different and perhaps more effective results. I just think that it might be good for some forms of debate to flourish here.

EDIT: I have to admit, Mediocre's point kills me. I surrender.

 

[Jazzy Jinx]

If worse comes worse and we have to have a 2 vs 1 debate then I volunteer to be the 1 against the 2. It is most likely that I would be eliminated but I'm just doing this for fun anyway. And hey, if I win, that would be cool.

If you guys need help with anything then I would be very happy to offer my services. You don't have to consider me but I'm just letting you all know not to be a stranger for help.

 

[Sizzle]

I am starting to wonder what the debate over Bible vs History is about. After signing up for it, I don't what I am debating over.

 

[Zephyr]

Is the bible historically accurate?

EDIT: Schedule should be up around 8-9? Interesting...I suppose there's nothing for it but to wait.