[split] Debating Lion IRC
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-01-2013, 06:01 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 06:09 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 03:29 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  My Edits will be Bolded and Underlined

Topic - Is there good evidence and arguments for the Resurrection of Jesus the Christ

Affirmative - Lion IRC

Negatitive - Atothetheist (Challenger)

Scope - Yeshua means the historical Jesus Of Nazareth. The Resurrection event referred to is the one accepted as being that mentioned in the Holy bible. Both debate contestants accept( in varying degree) the historicity of the person Jesus, whereas the affirmative side is a believer in the resurrection and is going to present evidence/arguments for the event in question. The Negative (Atothetheist) is going against the motion and is going to try to rebuke the evidence/arguments the Affirmative(Lion IRC) postion is going to make. The successful debate contestant will be the one that most effectively persuades the audience for or against the proposition. (Is there any evidence or logical basis to believe that it happened.) Both sides will argue the plausibility or otherwise of this biblical claim using any sources they deem sufficiently persuasive to make their arguments valid.

Format - Introduction of no more than 800words each. 3 main (substantive) debate posts of up to 1500 words each.Videos, Images, Charts, and other such materials are allowed, but they should be used sparingly and not get in the way of the debate. Citations where provided are to be listed separately at the end of each post. There shall be a 5 question Q&A interrogatory round prior to concluding remarks. Conclusion of no more than 900 words each.It is assumed that if a poster does not post within a REASONABLE( I.E four to five days) time limit, he has been preoccupied and/or not willing to continue. Edits will be allowed, but you must notify you opponents of your edit and state the reason of the edit on the bottom of your edited post.. Failure to submit a debate post within a reasonable time frame will result in a PM from the Mod to the absent poster to see if he is either preoccupied or otherwise busy. The poster is encouraged to immediately respond to avoid forfeiting the debate. The affirmative side will make the opening post. Notwithstanding the prevailing rules of the Forum in general, Moderation of the debate shall be done by KingsChosen. Mutual good will and civil dialogue is assumed and expected from all participants.



What do you think? Acceptable?



Editing. Nope. No editing of your post after it is submitted. Think carefully what you want to say BEFORE YOU SAY IT. The audience shouldnt need to retrospectively keep track of edits made to posts they have previously read.

Videos - Nope. If I want to watch someone else present your topic I dont need a ''middleman''. Nobody else filters what I am allowed to see on Youtube.
LOL. Wot a joke. Here, watch this video. Ta Da! I win.

Topic - I see you have retreated a LOT from your first position asserting (positively) there is...no logical evidence-based reason to believe in the Resurrection . How about we settle half way with...''Are there any good evidentiary or logical reasons to believe in the Resurrection of Jesus (The Christ)?''

Word count - NP. I dont mind what the maximum is, I simply wanted to have a limit per post for the same reason I wanted a clear finish line
for the end of the debate. 800/1500/900 is fine.

Forfeit - I'm happy to extend the post turnaround time from 72 hours to whatever you think you can manage. But I must insist that extensions to the submit deadline need to be requested in advance of the deadline and need to be mutually agreeable. IOW. If I cant meet a deadline (which I accepted as reasonable BEFORE the start of the debate,) then I will request a time extension and you will determine if my request is reasonable or not. If agreed, the Moderator will advise the audience accordingly.
eg. atothetheist has graciously agreed to a time extension request from Lion IRC
...who is clearly struggling to keep up with atothetheist's comprehensive and devastating posts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 07:53 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Quote: Editing. Nope. No editing of your post after it is submitted. Think carefully what you want to say BEFORE YOU SAY IT. The audience shouldnt need to retrospectively keep track of edits made to posts they have previously read.
Nope, sorry. If I make a huge factual error, and immediately realize my mistake, I would like to edit and fix the problem. If we follow the guidelines set up by me, editing shouldn't be an issue.

As for the videos. I am not filtering videos. You have the fucking discretion to watch them or not. The reason I am using a video is to use a a reference. As an example, if you have the historical method wrong, Instead of me copying and pasting something to correct you, I can easily post a video explaining comprehensively your error and the solution. I don't want to tediously explain something that detracts from the debate when I could simply post a vid and then proceed with my statement.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 07:57 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 07:53 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
Quote: Editing. Nope. No editing of your post after it is submitted. Think carefully what you want to say BEFORE YOU SAY IT. The audience shouldnt need to retrospectively keep track of edits made to posts they have previously read.
Nope, sorry. If I make a huge factual error, and immediately realize my mistake, I would like to edit and fix the problem. If we follow the guidelines set up by me, editing shouldn't be an issue.

As for the videos. I am not filtering videos. You have the fucking discretion to watch them or not. The reason I am using a video is to use a a reference. As an example, if you have the historical method wrong, Instead of me copying and pasting something to correct you, I can easily post a video explaining comprehensively your error and the solution. I don't want to tediously explain something that detracts from the debate when I could simply post a vid and then proceed with my statement.
The topic you consider "Half Way" is basically what the Title says. Question: if I rebuke all your points, does that make my side the winner?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 08:51 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Jesus Steven, I can find you a better website to debate on (that has a shit ton of theists) if you're that desperate.

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 09:21 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 09:31 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 07:53 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
Quote: Editing. Nope. No editing of your post after it is submitted. Think carefully what you want to say BEFORE YOU SAY IT. The audience shouldnt need to retrospectively keep track of edits made to posts they have previously read.
Nope, sorry. If I make a huge factual error, and immediately realize my mistake, I would like to edit and fix the problem. If we follow the guidelines set up by me, editing shouldn't be an issue.

As for the videos. I am not filtering videos. You have the fucking discretion to watch them or not. The reason I am using a video is to use a a reference. As an example, if you have the historical method wrong, Instead of me copying and pasting something to correct you, I can easily post a video explaining comprehensively your error and the solution. I don't want to tediously explain something that detracts from the debate when I could simply post a vid and then proceed with my statement.


Wanting/needing to edit a blunder in one of your posts after you have already submitted it is a deal breaker. Sorry.

If its only a small typo or something, bad luck.

The readers (who even notice/care) will know that when they see it. And if it tarnishes an otherwise high quality post, thems the breaks. Style/substance. Aim high. Get them both right and you'll out do your opponent who does not. This is, afterall, a public contest of ideas. If it were a friendly chess game I might let you take back a move.

If you are worried about making substantial, foolish, clumsy, uneducated errors of fact or reasoning during the debate, (which someone perhaps points out to you via PM or via the debate peanut gallery,) and which you think are imperative to edit, then I suggest you UP the amount of time allowed for you to prepare and proof-read your submissions.

I said you can have as long as you need. And this issue is precisely the reason why I make that offer.

No hard feelings if we cant come to an accomodation on this point. :cheers:

How about we just have a good old-fashioned, ongoing internet business as usual discussion thread on the topic with no rules, deadlines....and where everybody can join in and leave whenever they want and say what they want to whoever they want, rather than you having to put up with me 1-on-1 in some fancy Formal Debate thread.

hmmm?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 09:37 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 09:21 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  
(16-01-2013 07:53 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  Nope, sorry. If I make a huge factual error, and immediately realize my mistake, I would like to edit and fix the problem. If we follow the guidelines set up by me, editing shouldn't be an issue.

As for the videos. I am not filtering videos. You have the fucking discretion to watch them or not. The reason I am using a video is to use a a reference. As an example, if you have the historical method wrong, Instead of me copying and pasting something to correct you, I can easily post a video explaining comprehensively your error and the solution. I don't want to tediously explain something that detracts from the debate when I could simply post a vid and then proceed with my statement.


Wanting/needing to edit a blunder in one of your posts after you have already submitted it is a deal breaker. Sorry.

If its only a small typo or something, bad luck.

The readers (who even notice/care) will know that when they see it. And if it tarnishes an otherwise high quality post, thems the breaks. Style/substance. Aim high. Get them both right and you'll out do your opponent who does not. This is, afterall, a public contest of ideas. If it were a friendly chess game I might let you take back a move.

If you are worried about making substantial, foolish, clumsy, uneducated errors of fact or reasoning during the debate, (which someone perhaps points out to you via PM or via the debate peanut gallery,) and which you think are imperative to edit, then I suggest you UP the amount of time allowed for you to prepare and proof-read your submissions.

I said you can have as long as you need. And this issue is precisely the reason why I make that offer.

No hard feelings if we cant come to an accomodation on this point. :cheers:

How about we just have a good old-fashioned, ongoing internet business as usual discussion thread on the topic with no rules, deadlines....and where everybody can join in and leave whenever they want and say what they want to whoever they want, rather than you having to put up with me 1-on-1 in some fancy Formal Debate thread.

hmmm?
I still stay my position on the editing. If you notify and give accurate reasons as to why you are editing, then it shouldn't be a big deal. It's not that I'm not confident in my facts, it's just that I would like people to get as accurate information and we all make mistakes. P.S, wrong analogy, it's not taking back a move, but adjusting your chess piece. Adjusting, if it is called out, is ALLOWED in the rules of chess.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
16-01-2013, 09:56 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 10:03 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
Fair enough. We are both entitled to ''stand by'' our debate rule parameters. Sorry you dont have the same degree of confidence to stand by your debate post submissions.

Adjusting an accidentally bumped chess piece is not the same as moving it to the square you WISH you had played after realising your blundered move (post.)

In competition chess, both players have time to consider their move before they make it. In fact they both have a clock and an equal, (albeit not unlimited,) amount of time to consider their move. And if one player had as much time and as many chances to change their move as they wanted, that wouldnt be fair would it?

[Image: chess.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 10:08 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 09:56 PM)Lion IRC Wrote:  Fair enough. We are both entitled to ''stand by'' our debate rule parameters. Sorry you dont have the same degree of confidence to stand by your debate post submissions.

Adjusting an accidentally bumped chess piece is not the same as moving it to the square you WISH you had played after realising your blundered move (post.)

In competition chess, both players have time to consider their move before they make it. In fact they both have a clock and an equal (albeit not unlimited) amount of time to move. And if one player had as much time and as many chances to change their move as they wanted, that wouldnt be fair would it?

[Image: chess.jpg]

Your right, it wouldn't be fair. But I think you are thinking I might edit out all my bad arguments so that I would appear to look like a winner. The edit is simply for making sure all of the facts such as dates and quotes and citations are in order accurate and precise.

You are entitled to think what you want about it, but the Simple fact is that, if done like I described, editing is no big deal. I have a feeling that you don't want to edit because if I make a mistake, like let's say a wrong quote, you will simply say that since it is wrong, it will not count.

The debate is not so that you can have a pissing match on each other, It's for the spectators to view and evaluate. Having an assurance that the facts that you post and the citations you give are accurate is a big plus in a debate.

It's wrong to say that, by editing, I am able to move and then reconsider the movement. I am for allowing the edits to be applied to make it as accurate as possible.

By the way, it is giving you the opportunity to edit as well, so IT IS FAIR. It's not only one player that gets to edit, but both do.
Your parameters are killing me, Smalls. Drinking Beverage

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 10:42 PM
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
I told you didn't I, man?
Drinking Beverage







Oh yeah, I'm still waiting for clarification so that I may make an accurate response.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-01-2013, 10:47 PM (This post was last modified: 16-01-2013 10:53 PM by Lion IRC.)
RE: [split] Debating Lion IRC
(16-01-2013 10:08 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  ...The edit is simply for making sure all of the facts such as dates and quotes and citations are in order accurate and precise....

I certainly agree with the need to get facts, logic, dates, quotes, citations, reasoning, etc. used in your posts correct.
Excellent idea! Thumbsup

What I want to know is, how or why would you post anything other than that? How do you inadvertently put something in a formal debate post which you later realise is wrong...so wrong and so significant that the record absolutely must be set straight for the benefit of the readers who otherwise might be lead into error by your post.

How about you let ME point out the errors of fact in your debate post submissions? How about you let me draw the readers attention to any unthinking, inadvertent logical fallacies you make throughout the course of the debate? Big Grin

You know they have a rule in competion chess about the compulsion to move once you have touched a piece. Touch and move. Not only can you not take back a move once made, but if you even start to make a move and see a better alternative AFTER having picked up a piece, its too late. You must make your move with the piece you have already touched.

That might seem a bit strict, and of course it is for formal, tournament chess games not the kind you might play with a beginner.

But the rule actually forces you to think more carefully. It makes for a better game.

It conditions your mind into realising that if you are going to make a debate post chess move, you ought to THINK before you open your mouth make a move.

Can you not see the evolutionary survival advantage conferred on the thinker/competitor whose efforts are made without the luxury of a (mentally lazy) safety net of;
...hey relax everybody, it's OK, I can always go back and edit my post anytime and fix my mistakes later.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: