Debate Forum

[マツバ]

But if proper rules are set down for debates, and the rules are followed then im sure it could work very well. Im sure PC could find someone willing to mod the debates.

Lets look at the past attempt at a "mature discussion" forum, what happened? Went down in flames. Had rules, too, but that didn't stop the entire experiment from getting axed now did it?

And the main point to your post would be "rules are followed" because a lot don't, and as I said...

That will not prevent strong disagreements and people that take things personally, turning into a flame war. People can bypass rules, and not read them, happens all the time. If people were keen and followed all the rules, heck, moderators wouldn't have a job here. Point is, no matter how many stickies or rules you stuff people with, it won't magically repair or stop someone from flipping that switch and putting the thread off the golden path.

Moderators are there to keep the threads clean and stop ones that go over the line. And which threads do that most often? Those very tough issue and becoming personal debates. Which end up locked because people start up and never discuss formally, and react improperly.

If you want debates, there's a forum for it. Go post there, help OC's activity and that forum to flourish, rather than take its material (mostly) & discussion aspect away.

 

[Almia-Ranger]

Lets look at the past attempt at a "mature discussion" forum, what happened? Went down in flames. Had rules, too, but that didn't stop the entire experiment from getting axed now did it?

Fair enough, i can understand where your coming from but i believe with the right moderation, stiff rules and strict punishments for people who "go over the line" this could really be a great addition.

 

[Chibi-chan]

Fair enough, i can understand where your coming from but i believe with the right moderation, stiff rules and strict punishments for people who "go over the line" this could really be a great addition.

:|
Have you read the Other Chat Rules?
There are rules for those that go over the line and they are strictly enforced. In making a debate forum, should we condone some of the Other Chat rules?
"Oh, it's just his opinion on gays."
"It's my opinion on Jesus."
"I was just expression my opinion on minorities."
That's the argument people will make when they put something that's obviously bias, uneducated, or prejudice.

 

[Almia-Ranger]

"Oh, it's just his opinion on gays."
"It's my opinion on Jesus."
"I was just expression my opinion on minorities."
That's the argument people will make when they put something that's obviously bias, uneducated, or prejudice.

Just dont allow topics like that.
If you include topics such as sexuality, religion or minorities there will always be a group of people who will be abusive.
People would be racist, homophobic and basically uneducated.
I agree with what your saying but i believe that topics such as that should just be avoided.

 

[Legobricks]

Just dont allow topics like that.
If you include topics such as sexuality, religion or minorities there will always be a group of people who will be abusive.
People would be racist, homophobic and basically uneducated.
I agree with what your saying but i believe that topics such as that should just be avoided.

But those are the exact topics that make up the majority of debate threads, without those there is no debate forum.


There should be some sort of set standard for posts, yes? As in someone can't just come and say what they think about gay people or whatever, but must provide some decent explanation... I think if you get the right ruleset and enough staff standing there with riot batons it'll work, so long as they keep at their job.
And another thing: the mature members around here generally are the ones with over 1000 posts — I'd suggest some limit of this nature, being at least 600.

 

[Percy Thrillington]

And another thing: the mature members around here generally are the ones with over 1000 posts — I'd suggest some limit of this nature, being at least 600.

While I'm not opposed to the idea of a board for mature debating, I am opposed to your idea. Post count does not and will never signify maturity. If any restriction should be put in place, make it age.

 

[Renneh]

You wouldn't warn someone for saying they are rascist along with explaining why they are in a debate even though politically in your mind it is a wrong view to have... but if they were to be racist on the forum in those debate topics then you'd warn them. Simple as that, I'm sure the moderators will have no issue over when to warn someone and when to not.


I understand it has been tried before but I'm sure it wasn't all bad. Just because there are a few bad eggs that turn debates into I'm gonna flame your opinion because I'm right and you're wrong instead of the art of challenging the validity of opinions (oh I love playing Devils advocate) doesn't mean others shouldn't be giving a chance. =)

I only use other forums is because the one I have in my head is as active as this one. And it is another pokemon forum I'm thinking of.

But, we are a forum that tends to not react well when certain topics arise, a new sub-forum would not magically fix this crack in our armor.

Sorry, you misunderstood me. I know creating a separate sub-forum won't stop people from reacting badly, but it makes it a clear place to debate.

what's your definition of debate? What about discussion? Here's the problem; a casual thread about how a death occurred comes up, some people disagree, that's a debate, right?

As I said before the other forum I'm thinking of is another Pokemon forum for a soon-to-be online game so it isn't a far leap from this one. Same age group.
The debate forum would be a place for controversial big questions... discussion over a specific person's death, that is a hard one because some places would stick that in their debate forum, but in my opinion it would still belong in other chat here because it is something that is smaller in comparison even if people disagree, it isn't always going to be a worldly issue.
For example, err I don't know..
Prisoner insert name was killed in a fight against another prisoner, do you think the prison guards could have prevented such a thing? Its very specific...
where as...
How much protection do prisoners need against each other? Are prisoners doing enough to prevent fights in prison? would belong in a debate because its broad, about the whole thing. People may bring up examples but you're debating the whole thing.

Sorry for my useless examples =)

 

[Almia-Ranger]

But those are the exact topics that make up the majority of debate threads, without those there is no debate forum.


There should be some sort of set standard for posts, yes? As in someone can't just come and say what they think about gay people or whatever, but must provide some decent explanation... I think if you get the right ruleset and enough staff standing there with riot batons it'll work, so long as they keep at their job.
And another thing: the mature members around here generally are the ones with over 1000 posts — I'd suggest some limit of this nature, being at least 600.

Yes, i totally agree. Maybe posts have to be approved by mod or thread starter?
But yes, explaination is needed to backup your reasoning. That is basically what i was trying to say, just didn't know how to put it.

 

[Renneh]

I was thinking whether a set post limit would work but then it doesn't always work out that way. o.o It's difficult to justify judging maturity by age or forum post count. =)

And also thinking of myself =) Depending on how high the post limit is, I will probably not be able to post there for quite a while.


I think threads being approved by a moderator is a much better idea.

 

[Angela]

About this debate forum, I like the idea I have seen it on other forums, and I gotta say it seams to be working on there,

I can definitely see myself posting in there, even reviving a thread that was considered to "Harsh" for the other chat and got closed, it was about religion and I would love it if members would have gotten the opportunity to debate on it, but a section like that must be monitored a lot and it must have some rules that members must follow like:

30 word limit, and a 60 letters limit, no direct insults at people, no name calling and never go off topic and and never judge someones debate, and your either with the topic or against it and you can only debate for 1 side.

I mean you can hardly debate using only 4 words and 25 letters, and those who would put the effort of making the post with those high standard I'm sure they are not spamming, I mean why spam and put a lot of effort in it.

Then there must be some standards and guide lines on what the topic should be,

No one is going to debate about what kind of beans are better "If they did I'm sure that would not last for long"

And they debate section could have a tourney were members would be elected and then put in teams and have to make some convincing arguments, and 1 team would be with and the other against.

 

[Almia-Ranger]

While I'm not opposed to the idea of a board for mature debating, I am opposed to your idea. Post count does not and will never signify maturity. If any restriction should be put in place, make it age.

Another thing is, age does not signify maturity. There are some young people who are very mature and have very respective opinion and can hold themselves in a debate. Therefore, i'm opposed to your idea.

 

[Percy Thrillington]

30 word limit, and a 60 letters limit, no direct insults at people, no name calling and never go off topic and and never judge someones debate, and your either with the topic or against it and you can only debate for 1 side.

What are you talking about? A thirty word limit isn't going to change anything. It might be as worthless as a post with one letter or as good as a post with fifty thousand. You can't set limits like that unless you want to pretend to yourself that that would make the board more organised. A character limit is useless if there's a word limit. Also, may I suggest that you should go and take a few English classes, because a thirty word limit means that people can only post up to thirty words. No direct insults/no name calling/going off-topic is already dealed with in the main forum guidelines. And what? If you don't judge someone's debate, how are you meant to debate back? And alright, your last idea makes sense.

I mean you can hardly debate using only 4 words and 25 letters, and those who would put the effort of making the post with those high standard I'm sure they are not spamming, I mean why spam and put a lot of effort in it.

No. Seriously. Quality over quantity. A lengthy post does not necessarily mean a good post.

No one is going to debate about what kind of beans are better "If they did I'm sure that would not last for long"

I don't know. I wouldn't put it past a couple of people.

Another thing is, age does not signify maturity. There are some young people who are very mature and have very respective opinion and can hold themselves in a debate. Therefore, i'm opposed to your idea.

Alright, that's true. If it was necessary, I'd put forward the idea to make staff choose who should be allowed to post in the board.

 

[Renneh]

and your either with the topic or against it and you can only debate for 1 side.

That might prove tricky for some, because some of us would like to tease out the logical issues in people's debates rather than choosing a side. Some debates are rather complex and the sides aren't always clear, there may be an inbetween mark.

 

[Michii]

While I'm not opposed to the idea of a board for mature debating, I am opposed to your idea. Post count does not and will never signify maturity. If any restriction should be put in place, make it age.

Well, don't you believe that maturity by age is unfair as well? There are plenty of say twelve year olds in the world who are more mature than sixteen year olds. Plus, there are some older members here that I personally don't believe would be mature enough for the debates anyway. And then there are members like myself, who do not feel comfortable with displaying their age on the forum. Would they be pushed out of a forum section because of their comfortability with their personal info?

Haha, now looking at the debate in this thread, I'm starting to overlook the "PC not really debate forum." The real issue for me now is the members that post in a debate forum. Just throwing this on the table, but don't you think a form would be a good solution to the maturity problem?" A set of questions could be answered or something of the sort, and staff or someone could approve or disapprove for the forum. While this idea would probably crash and burn due to the sheer mass numbers of members, it's worth a shot. Possibly. :33

 

[Angela]

What are you talking about? A thirty word limit isn't going to change anything. It might be as worthless as a post with one letter or as good as a post with fifty thousand. You can't set limits like that unless you want to pretend to yourself that that would make the board more organised.

I'm sure they are not spamming, I mean why spam and put a lot of effort in it.

Really you did not have to comment that I already explained why I thought a word limit would be a good thing.

A character limit is useless if there's a word limit. Also, may I suggest that you should go and because a thirty word limit means that people can only post up to thirty words. No direct insults/no name calling/going off-topic is already dealed with in the main forum guidelines. And what?

PC has both of those things.

If you don't judge someone's debate, how are you meant to debate back?

That really is me translating bad from Icelandic, I meant don't shoot anyone down so that there feelings will be hurt that bad, and if they post from own experience don't diss that,

Caution should be shown in a presence of a soul.

take a few English classes,

First I would like to point to you that I already am taking English classes " I am From Iceland", and that English is more of a 3rd language in Iceland so I really can't help my bad English grammar.

And alright, your last idea makes sense.

Thank you:D

 

[Volkner's Apprentice]

In my humble opinion . . .

I'm not so sure. Thinking about it, PC doesn't seem like a very debate-oriented forum. Iono, I mean it could be me, but the majority of the members here seem laid back and agreeable on most things.

That's just because there's no point in getting all crazy about particular topics on a Pokemon forum, when you should just be having fun anyway. I guarantee there's plenty of members here who are very passionate about particular topics. Although debating can be fun, depending on the topic, the average audience of PC isn't mature enough to handle debates, despite whatever age they claim to be or whatever mastery of the topics they claim to have.

That new implication? That's called 'Other Chat' now. It's working just fine actually. The trial and error phase had happened awhile ago and apparently...it didn't work out so well. We all know that in a Proposition 8 thread, there will be idiotic homophobics who just won't say why they are, but will just argue it for arguments sake. I'm sorry but PC is supposed to be a kid friendly Pokemon website, not a debate and discussion forum.

Bleh, let's not delve into Prop 8. If PC ever went back to debates, all things religiously related (and technically that falls into that category just because so many people believe it to be religiously based) would be completed banned from discussion, just as they are now in OC. Politics gets heated enough as it is, and even that gets to the point where it's like "you're so stupid" or "are you kidding? Did you even read the 5,000 links I posted to every article stating opinions similar to mine?" It's really just territory that needn't be crossed.

And they debate section could have a tourney were members would be elected and then put in teams and have to make some convincing arguments, and 1 team would be with and the other against.

XD I like that idea; but that's because I'm tourney crazy. :P It'd be more like debate teams on particular issues, that might be a nice addition and fun for members. At the same time, though, members would never put enough effort into it like they do things in the Battle Stadium. People might say "I think this" but they probably don't have the energy and/or word-power to go on and on and on about particular topics unrelated to religion/politics.


My thoughts on this overall, however, lead to me saying nah to a debate thread. After being here two years (more or less like, 20 months, since I was inactive for awhile) I noticed that suggestions and feedback often get negative results from the staff. When I first opened this thread and read I was like "yay, debates, that'd be a nice addition", but I then I realized, just as I've seen with other ideas and suggestions, the staff has already gone through a type of debate forum before. They've seen what it results in because idiots ruin the fun for everyone, so they have no choice but to end the madness. Same goes for the other ideas; PC has already tried them, so don't take it as if the staff is shutting down your idea/suggestion (also not saying anyone thinks that :x). They just already did it, and even though the memberbase of PC has shifted and perhaps there are a good group of members that can handle it, it's still an iffy topic because they wouldn't want to through the work to build it up, create, and moderate it, only for it to come crashing down again.

Debating can be fun, and even though I think the majority of Other Chat topics don't go near debating (because you can only back up your reasoning to enjoying blackberry-banana creme pie for so long), the two main reasons a forum for debates can't be done:

a) It's been done before, and it's chaos, because losers will act out/voice their opinions instead of using facts and analysis and they'll cave the roof in on us all. (even on the little topics that you wouldn't think would bring any controversy..haha.)

b) The majority of debates that are sane already happen to an extent in Other Chat. So in turn, it's just better to keep things so they're level-headed.

 

[Renneh]

It could work this time, as I said before, just because there are a few bad apples, doesn't mean the whole bunch will be bad. Or we shouldn't give it another go.

IF we followed the principle to the extreme, that if a few topics erupt into flaming/breaking rules then a forum should be shut down, where would any forums on the Internet be today?

o.o I'd like to give it a chance and I really believe the moderators could handle a forum like that.


The Tournament idea would be hard to judge, maybe points for debating skills...research skills could come into it but 'winning' a debate doesn't often occur. Infact, it is sort of impossible.

 

[Almia-Ranger]

but 'winning' a debate doesn't often occur. Infact, it is sort of impossible.

I agree. It is impossible. But you can sway people to your point of view, giving evidence for your point and explaining in enough detail forit to be understandable. You could have points on how you explain yourself and the detail in your explaination.

 

[Legobricks]

Post count does not and will never signify maturity.

Apparently not, but it seems to be so in the case of PC. Just a simple observation of mine.

It could work this time, as I said before, just because there are a few bad apples, doesn't mean the whole bunch will be bad. Or we shouldn't give it another go.

IF we followed the principle to the extreme, that if a few topics erupt into flaming/breaking rules then a forum should be shut down, where would any forums on the Internet be today?

o.o I'd like to give it a chance and I really believe the moderators could handle a forum like that.

Indeed... I was thinking about how if they re-enabled the reputation system, why not give other things another go too.
There'd need to be more moderators recruited — existing ones already have their hands full.

 

[Percy Thrillington]

Really you did not have to comment that I already explained why I thought a word limit would be a good thing.

PC has both of those things.

That really is me translating bad from Icelandic, I meant don't shoot anyone down so that there feelings will be hurt that bad, and if they post from own experience don't diss that,

Caution should be shown in a presence of a soul.

First I would like to point to you that I already am taking English classes " I am From Iceland", and that English is more of a 3rd language in Iceland so I really can't help my bad English grammar.

Thank you:D

1). Your idea was an idea. Nothing more. It was open to discussion and therefore, I could comment on it if I wanted. I explained why it was a bad thing and the cons far outweigh the pros in this situation.

2). If PC already has both of those things, why would they need to be reinstated?

3). Your post, for the most part, made no sense. Because of that, I see no reason to reply to any more of it because I don't understand it at all.

Apparently not, but it seems to be so in the case of PC. Just a simple observation of mine.

I beg to differ. There are plenty of people with a low post count who are perfectly capable of debating and plenty of people with a high post count who could not debate for their lives.

There'd need to be more moderators recruited — existing ones already have their hands full.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. The Thunder-Dome was pretty much a failure and the likeliness of this idea seeing the light of day is pretty slim.