Instigator / Pro
0
1632
rating
20
debates
72.5%
won
Topic
#2492

CROSS-EXAMINATION (beta): Churches should not have their tax-exempt status removed.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
0
Better sources
0
0
Better legibility
0
0
Better conduct
0
0

After not so many votes...

It's a tie!
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
5,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
0
1417
rating
158
debates
32.59%
won
Description

I wanted to try something that is perhaps new. I think cross-examination is a useful method of debating so I was considering how to accomplish this within the current format. This debate is unrated. Here are the rules:

--Each participant will get to ask and answer 4 questions.

--There will be no responses or rebuttals to an opponent's answer. You are only allowed to ask another question.

--The Instigator will open Round 1 by waiving.

--In the Contender's portion of Round 1, they will ask their first question to the Instigator.

--Opening Round 2, the Instigator will answer the Contender's question, then they will ask the Contender a question.

--Subsequent rounds will follow the same format (provide an answer to previous question, ask a new question) until Round 5.

--In Round 5, the Instigator will follow the normal procedure of answering the Contender's previous question, as well as asking a new question. However, in the Contender's portion of Round 5, they will ONLY provide an answer and end the cross examination. This should allow each participant to ask and answer 4 questions.

Here's an example of what it should look like:
---------------------
Round 1 (Instigator): Waive.

Round 1 (Contender):
Ask Contender's first question (CQ1=Contender Question #1).
-------------------------
Round 2 (Instigator):
Answer CQ1.
Ask IQ1.

Round 2 (Contender):
Answer IQ1.
A CQ2.
-------------------------
Round 3 (Instigator):
Answer CQ2.
Ask IQ2.

Round 3 (Contender):
Answer IQ2.
Ask CQ3.
----------------------
Round 4 (Instigator):
Answer CQ3.
Ask IQ3.

Round 4 (Contender):
Answer IQ3.
Ask CQ4.
------------------------
Round 5 (Instigator):
Answer CQ4.
Ask IQ4.

Round 5 (Contender):
Answer IQ4.
End cross examination.
-------------------------

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

middle-age might seem irrelevant, but the past builds toward the future. From mistakes about monarchy, we have established stronger monarch based governments. Similarly, if we allow the pope to be tax-exempt merely because they can excommunicate the monarch, then there is a terrifying implication of power and influence. I hope that question didn't seem too outlandish.

-->
@seldiora

Yes, I'm thinking this would not actually work well as a stand alone form of debating for that reason. If I were to test this again, I would probably do so following a real debate. This would allow for participants to question content already discussed there.

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

I think the questions dwindle over time as they are answered. Also thanks for making the topic worldwide. I think this is near impossible in US where you can't really buy land like in Estonia

-->
@seldiora

Just saw your comment after posting. I am alright continuing with 4 questions. Go ahead and post 4 in your next round of you want to

we have a lot of space. 3~4 questions doesn't seem like a lot.

-->
@seldiora

Yeah, I'm realizing my wording in the description could have been better to clarify that. What if we adjust and ask 2 questions PER ROUND instead? 4 might be too many but again, this could be adjusted in another debate.

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

oh, sorry. I thought you meant each round you can ask 4 questions. Asking only 1 is too short lol

Well, since seldiora accepted we'll give it a shot just for kicks

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

oops. Well, you could argue that this version is more compacted together and allows all answers to be viewed at once, rather than check and guess for random ideas. Or delete this debate if you really want. Up to you.

-->
@BearMan

Oh cool. Maybe I'll delete this for now so I can check that out since it'll probably be less confusing!

ok, we can test if discord or DART is a better platform for asking these kind of questions.

-->
@Fruit_Inspector

There is a discord server for this:

https://discord.gg/QKD9rru

My thought was this could provide a useful framework for two participants to follow up on a good debate. It could possibly be used as a stand alone tool to. I know it's a bit convoluted but I didn't want to do any less than four questions, and I couldn't organize it better given the 5 round limit.

Feel free to give suggestions or feedback if you think this seems like it could be useful. If not, I suppose public ridicule would be fitting. It might be a flop, but I thought it was worth a try!