Jareena Faye Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 If you think you're capable of having an intelligent conversation from opposing viewpoints, vote yes. If flames tend to shoot from your ears, vote no. If you're not interested in engaging in debates, just don't vote. Well, I think I've caused enough controversy for one day. My work here is done. *whoosh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kasmandre Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 I get enough debate in my daily life (I live in a "political affairs" dorm, so I get to hear every radical, nutjob, and facist on campus), but I know enough to just avoid debate topics, so null vote for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peredhil Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 Technically, This would be a member only vote. Not that this particular subject is so drastic, but rather the precedent it sets: Who determines the Pen's goals and structure? If we open votes determining the future of the Pen to guests, who Bows to remove the sting haven't become even Candidates for consideration, then any one could determine the future of the Pen just by making multiple accounts and 'stuffing the ballot' box. On the bright side, I can only stand back and admire the connotations of your phrasing. If you think you're capable of having an intelligent conversation from opposing viewpoints, vote yes This is particularly effective at a Literary site devoted to growth and development - It implies anyone voting no is either incapable of having an intelligent conversation, or, even worse in today's Politically Correct society, intolerant of opposing viewpoints, with all the accompanying baggage of racial (intercultural) intolerance, gender intolerance, and intelligence intolerance. This is further heightened with the statement, If flames tend to shoot from your ears, vote no.Which gives the impression that the only reason to vote no is a lack of self control. Extremely well done! You have a definite future, if you chose to pursue it, as a Political speech writer or in advertising. Applauds her writing skills I decline to vote. Having made my stance clear on yet another thread, I find this one redundant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Portrait of Zool Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 Zool stands with Peredhil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Degenero Angelus Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 And Deg stands.. Nowhere. I'm sitting. Regardless, debates are a bad idea. In my experience (And god knows I've had enough..). They either lead to people getting insulted, offended, or depressed. People's views are their own, and no one has the right to tell them that their views are wrong. Not voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whynotsin Posted March 15, 2003 Report Share Posted March 15, 2003 I enjoy having a debate from time to tme, but in person. I feel that online debates while they have matiet are more used to purely vent by to many people. This oten leads to unfounded arguments and unsupported answers, that lead to negative and somtimes harmful effects on others. I will not vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 (edited) personally... I never classified rants and debates in the same catagory... If I rant i do so to vent... kinda like automatic writing... usually i'm not looking for any outside input... other than of an understanding sounding board... this of course should not be confused with my version of rambling... which is usually light-hearted, fun, and inclined to spark inspiration when blocked n'stuff... Anyways back to debate... Hmm, never understood the appeal of formalized debate for the sake of debate...(but then again, i was a band freak...) If an issue presents itself, I deal with it. If I need to defend myself or position I do likewise. However, if am being attacked for the sake of attack, I usually refuse to play. (especially those devils advocate ppls) So as for formalized depates, I don't believe they are needed. I vote null. If an issue is important enough to merrit that kind of scruntity, it will present itself in due course, with little need for proding. The relm of academia and politics are more suited for depates anyways...and will prolly present you more of a challenge... revery the dreamlost "ick" the dream continues... Edited March 16, 2003 by reverie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaeha Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 Myself, I rather enjoy the occasional debate. But all things have their place, and this is not the place for debates. It's not as if it would be that hard, really, to arrange a debate if you really cared to. Just go into someone's profile and email them, or some such. But not on the main boards. We come here to write, or to talk. Not to argue. Particularly when they become theological or philosophical in nature, debates and arguments are a wonderful way of making enemies left and right, and you can't get good feedback if everyone either hates you or loves you. Apart from that, that isn't the purpose, from what I've seen, of this site anyway. Just my thoughts. My vote is nonexistant. Treat it as a null if you must treat it as something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Pointy One Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 Well, whether or not here is the place for debate, I personall don't like debating that often, because, well, I'm not that informed. I like to think that's an important part of debate, you know. To know facts. Some stuff is all opinion, but a majority of it is good to have some sort of research done to back yourself up. Meh. Of course, I'm always up for throwing in my two cents if there's any debate going in say, the irc chat. Hehehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whynotsin Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 (edited) Well Faye i guess there you got your debate lol p.c so much debate about not having a debate, most cleaver about you Faye if I don't say so myself. Edited March 16, 2003 by whynotsin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamaranis Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 Not that I'm saying this should be like other boards or anything... but there are a lot of boards devoted to something in particular, in this case writing, which also have an area where current events are discussed. Nothing has to turn ugly if no one wants it to, and its perfectly possible for people on opposite sides of the fence to still get along. Personally I wouldn't mind if the occasional debate turned up, because I'd like to hear the opinions and thoughts of members of this community, but if not, oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenproletariat Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 stirring the pot, is my comment... *stands beside Peredhil and Zool* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwaihir Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 I think I'm joining Lump Pered and Zool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valdar and Astralis Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 Abstain, I think. Beleive me, however, when I say I have seen far too many posts for healthy debate go right down the drain into an all out shout feast due to a single flippiant comment. Maybe it's because I have been hanging out in one too many everquest board. *shrugs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 I likewise abstain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blondemoon Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 I'm going the route of most of the others, and flat out refusing to vote on this. I believe this has been said before, but it is also my own personal belief that debates can start out all good and well, but can also lead to allllll sorts of trouble and hard feelings between people that ordinarily get along just fine. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Silver Posted March 16, 2003 Report Share Posted March 16, 2003 I stand behind...well everyone who has posted on this. When you debate on tyhe internet they alway degrade down to flame fest. (I know from experince) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamaranis Posted March 17, 2003 Report Share Posted March 17, 2003 I know for a fact that internet debates do not always turn into flame fests, because I've seen a few go on for months sans flame, and then just sort of die away. It all depends on who's involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareena Faye Posted March 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2003 Technically, This would be a member only vote. I totally forgot about that... sorry dudes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Celes Crusader Posted March 17, 2003 Report Share Posted March 17, 2003 We can have discussions upon something that matters all of us everyday, but one thing I've learned while surfing on the internet is that some debate can be totally nasty, especially if the topic is rather politic, religious or sensitive (ie about racism, for example). This place is like a chalet with a fireplace, where we gather around, relax and share our interest for writing. So I'll refrain voting as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canid Posted March 18, 2003 Report Share Posted March 18, 2003 *Canid clears her throat and tentatively offers her opinion, obviously outspoken as she is.* I voted. I voted yes. *looks around* That is not to say I think debates should be started simply for the purpose of debating, whether it intended to be intelligent or not - I would not approve of that. But a debate starting naturally from someone wanting to voice their opinion and argued with the utmost respect for other people's opinions, not to mention their feelings, is definately something that should be acceptable here. On most boards, I have no hesitation in saying that it probably would turn into a situation where people get upitty and hurt, but here, from observation and past experience, I feel it safe to say it is much more safe. I have seen (and written in) debates here on religion, abortion... and felt free to post a rather controvercial poem in support of home-parenting. None of them turned into anything offensive and all were of interest and merit from an educational point of view. I think it is a very positive thing if people here can feel free to express their opinions on delicate matters - for some people, it may be the only public way they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted March 18, 2003 Report Share Posted March 18, 2003 i agree, but just don't see the need to formalize it... call me silly, but i just don't like the notion of someone singling out a topic and saying okay we're going to depate it. Trivial? Maybe. But if you have a overwhelming need to air something, then just do it. ppl will then naturally either choose to afrim or disagree with you, and some will post on it. Aye, the thing I fear the most, is someone firing off pure point by point greek style agruments. Where the would be socriates willfully baites the opposer with logic traps which destroys the other's person foundations... Where technique wins out over content. Reminds me too much of lawyers... *shudders* revery the dreamlost "so ya think ya can tell, heaven from hell" (pink floyd) the dream continues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canid Posted March 19, 2003 Report Share Posted March 19, 2003 (edited) That is exactly what I was saying reverie, , hence: That is not to say I think debates should be started simply for the purpose of debating, whether it intended to be intelligent or not - I would not approve of that. But a debate starting naturally from someone wanting to voice their opinion and argued with the utmost respect for other people's opinions, not to mention their feelings, is definately something that should be acceptable here. Edited March 19, 2003 by Canid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seii Posted March 28, 2003 Report Share Posted March 28, 2003 I voted yes. I think that so far nobody has just unconditionally voted yes, so I will. Contrary me. Now for the obligatory explanation. I personally cannot get angry at anything said online, no matter how offensive, rude, childish, etc. For some reason I have been blessed (by no effort or deserving of my own) with the ability to always see online as online, a place where many of us are probably relying heavily on parts of ourself that we normally don't use in everyday public settings. Therefore I cannot get mad at the avatar of someone, because most likely nothing said online can be taken totally seriously. With that being said, I also know that most people forget this at times and as such the internet is a wide, EXTREMELY flammable place, drenched in gasoline and giving out free waterproof matches at the door. In other words, Tokyo in any apocalyptic anime. So to sum up? I believe we SHOULD have debates and I would LOVE to (hence voting yes), but I do not believe the human race is able to handle large public debates in places where we cannot see the faces of the people we discuss with. Heck, we can't even handle those public ones most times. Long post....oh well, sometimes I do that. ....Hey, where'd this soap box come from? *tosses it out the window* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts