Public Apology

[Crimson King]

Well, after rooting out the issue regarding the "Pirating Music" topic, I'd like to issue an apology to AltF4. The topic was supposed to be a test for Aqua. to prove herself as a competent debater. In a rebuttal to her argument, I tried to leave room for her to expound upon her debate and refute my points, but instead, AltF4, an intelligent Debater, replied, which defeated the purpose of such a thing. Feeling that this was a violation of my decree that no mods post in here, I lashed out and edited out his posts. This was done in haste, and I owe Alt an apology for such a thing as it came to light that Zero Beat actually granted him permission to post in here.

This room is, at the most basic, a training room. I want the new generation of Debaters to be tossed through the rock tumbler of experience and develop as posters who can hold their own. In reality, this room doesn't matter THAT much, but I do want to keep a level of quality because people will be presenting their beliefs in as vulnerable a fashion and arguing the credibility of it. For those that take the room seriously, they deserve respect in presenting their opinions. As such, I feel an educated and experienced debater will create the atmosphere I hope to achieve.

Once again, I am sorry to Alt for such a hasty and harsh reaction, and I hope this eases any tensions.

 

[-ACE-]

Well said, CK.

 

[AltF4]

It was just a misunderstanding and miscommunication. I could very well have tried to look further into your argument to see if it were intentionally weak so as to leave room for argument.

Perhaps there should be some accepted method for declaring when an argument you are making is not complete / representative of your own thoughts. This may also help to clear up misquotes later on. Someone could very well in the future look back at these statements out of context.

Something akin to saying: "[Devil's Advocate]" or "[Intentionally Weak]". I dunno.

 

[Crimson King]

The problem is, I don't want them looking for it specifically in those posts. I want them to look for it every post possible, and use that as a means of creating an argument. Not really sure HOW to do it, but if every now and then while seriously arguing a topic I toss in a hole-filled argument, it should help the prospective debater in attacking my argument. Also, as a rule, I try not to use citations, and that should be the first thing someone points out if I declare anything. Things like that are what make great debaters.

 

[thegreatkazoo]

I would more so say that such a job should be held in the PGers themselves--viz. they should actively be looking for weaknesses in each other's argument's and addressing them as such.

In fact, I would argue that this concept is what makes someone ready for the DH proper.

Also, props to you owning to your mistake.

 

[GoldShadow]

We all make mistakes. Well, I don't. But I meant the rest of you mere mortals.

 

[-ACE-]

We all make mistakes. Well, I don't. But I meant the rest of you mere mortals.

Lol. I admit, that was funny.

 

[Kewkky]

Lol. I admit, that was funny.

I also truly believe that it was funny to an extent, not to the point where morals and beliefs come into play. I also agree that the point made in your own post was valid and it should be considered heavily when chosen for lack of logical truths and judged as 'sub-par'.

source

 

[-ACE-]

extenct

*extent

source

Disclaimer: no offense is to be taken from this harmless and friendly post, which is clearly a joke and not an attack at anyone. Kewkky is cool in my book.

<3

 

[Aesir]

Guys cool it on the off topic ramblings.

 

[KrazyGlue]

It was just a misunderstanding and miscommunication. I could very well have tried to look further into your argument to see if it were intentionally weak so as to leave room for argument.

Perhaps there should be some accepted method for declaring when an argument you are making is not complete / representative of your own thoughts. This may also help to clear up misquotes later on. Someone could very well in the future look back at these statements out of context.

Something akin to saying: "[Devil's Advocate]" or "[Intentionally Weak]". I dunno.

The problem is, I don't want them looking for it specifically in those posts. I want them to look for it every post possible, and use that as a means of creating an argument. Not really sure HOW to do it, but if every now and then while seriously arguing a topic I toss in a hole-filled argument, it should help the prospective debater in attacking my argument. Also, as a rule, I try not to use citations, and that should be the first thing someone points out if I declare anything. Things like that are what make great debaters.

I think the way to prevent future issues such as this would be to disallow DH members from debating each other in this room. The only purpose of debaters being in this room is to test temp debaters, so DH members shouldn't be arguing against each other.

That way, we don't have to label "intentionally weak" posts, but we also won't have issues like these.