Total posts: 3,159
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
lol
Or maybe something like, "Debates which require votes."
That would help direct voters to the debates which need them the most and would be much more efficient than the current forum thread we have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Hence I believe it should only be considered, if it is overwhelmingly prefered over the combined total from other options.
Wait, so even if Yes2 gains a majority, it won't be the option implemented?
Created:
Posted in:
Polling (updated 05/28/2020, 12:22am PT):
Of 12 votes total...
1. Ratify the new Code of Conduct?
9 Yes, 3 No
9 Yes, 3 No
2. Allow sharing of Private Messages?
6 Yes1, 5 Yes2, 1 No
3. Change the Voting Policy to expand S&G to include other excessive legibility issues?
8 Yes, 2 No, 2 Abstain
4. Require a reason when submitting a report?
2 Yes, 9 No1, 0 No2 (1 unclear)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Maybe the best debates of all time?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
The saddest part is that technically speaking, DDO is still more "alive" than DART (by a long shot).
This site ranks:#28,696In global internet traffic and engagement over the past 90 days
This site ranks:#3,929,951In global internet traffic and engagement over the past 90 days
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Remember the debate we had on DDO? (I think it was on birth control or something like that)
You know the weirdly formatted google doc link I posted that contained the argument?
Yeah it was because half the time, the site literally refreshes and erases the argument you type in directly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
The website was bought by Juggle. They didn't care about it whatsoever, and technical issues (such as the ones mentioned by K_Michael) were never resolved. Moderation became virtually non-existent as well.
Then the trolls and spambots came.
Then the trolls and spambots came.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@nmvarco
Just so happens to also be the 3000th post (never realized this actually)
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
However, after what I watched Biden say in an interview today or yesterday, I have to raise the question as my own topic because what he said was: "I'm going to beat Joe Biden."
Did you even read your own link?
Created:
-->
@crossed
No it is 4567 because we are assuming it goes in order.Not random
No, you're just assuming that. There's nothing that says it's more statistically likely than any other combination.
For example, if I flip heads 50 times, what's my next flip going to be?
According to vox that gal got a noble prize for the maleria cure.Plus it is in the history books from the Vietnam war.Because They won many battle's because the chinese gave them this herbal cure.
Ok. That doesn't prove this point:
medicen in plants for all disease
What part of my argument is from incredulity.
The whole thing.
It takes thinking knowledge and intelligence to create medicine.As we see from prescription drug creation.SO the stuff found in nature would logically require intelligence knowledge and thinking.
Did you read the link I posted?
Created:
-->
@crossed
You do relise that there are medicine in plants. Why would they interact with prescription drugs if there was no medicine in them
Yes. Some medications are synthesized from plants. But that isn't what you're trying to prove.
Let's go crossed, let's go! 👏👏
Let's go crossed, let's go! 👏👏
I BELIEVE IN YOU BUDDY!!!
YOU CAN DO IT!!!
Created:
-->
@crossed
Let's go crossed-san,
if you can't do it no one can!
Gooooooooo crossed!
WOOOOOOO!!!
Created:
-->
@crossed
A few down, many thousands more to go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Wait, how can there be a 75% yes with 10 people voting? 75% would mean that 7.5 people voted yes.Two people abstaining, so only 8 votes counted toward that.
Oh okay then. Makes sense lol.
Oh yeah nearly forgot to mention, but for #1, 3 people (crossed, ILikePie5, and SupaDudz) voted no, not 2.Thank you for the correction.
No problem!
Created:
-->
@crossed
I am pretty sure there is a plant for every disease.I am using this logic.Lets say there are 7 doors.The first 3 doors are numbered one two and three.It would be logical to assume the last four doors to be numbered four five six and seven.Would it not be.
It is just as statistically likely for those doors to be numbered "4, 5, 6, and 7" as it is for them to be numbered "21, 69, 420, and 1738".
That is what i am doing here.I find article saying plant cures maleria.I find article saying plant cure's Hiv.I find article saying plant cure's diabetes's.I find articles saying plant cures cancer.It would be logical for me to assume there are plants for other disease to. would it not.
The problem is, those articles aren't nearly enough to constitute a working proof.
It has to be god who put medicine in plants.It takes thinking knowledge and intelligence to create prescription drug.Thus it takes thinking knowledge and intelligence to create medicine in plant.
Prove it, because what you have right now is an Argument from Incredulity.
Created:
Posted in:
I agree, not about locking up children in classrooms and forcing them to listen to audiobooks for 6 hours, but with the fact that the public school system in the US (and to a certain extent Canada) is woefully outdated. The current educational system in use was developed in 18th century Prussia with the express intent of hammering loyalty and obedience into the populace. It does a fantastic job of preparing children for the factory line, where the amount of creativity and critical thinking required is minimal. However, when it comes to meeting the demands of the 21st-century workforce, where the ability to innovate and collaborate with others is becoming increasingly paramount, our method of educating the next generation has utterly failed.
Created:
-->
@crossed
I am not Saying that one plant cure's every disease.
I'm not saying that either.
I am saying it looks like there is a plant for every disease.
So you're saying you're not sure whether there actually is a plant for every disease?
Btw we are talking about a strange breed of Oregano not the one you see online for sale
Ok...?
Insulin plant was introduced to India in recent times. The plant has been regarded as being a magical, natural cure for diabetes. Even though the herb is primarily used for curing diabetes,
To prove the point you made in the title, you need to identify a core characteristic that all diseases have (and prove that it indeed applies to every single disease). Then, you need to identify plants that can be provably applied to that core characteristic to provably cure the disease. Sound too difficult? I'll make it easier for you.
Here is a list of known diseases:
Find a plant-based cure for every single one of them.
Once you're finished with that, you then need to prove that God exists and that He put them there.
Because I don't EVER want to go down the endless rabbit hole that is the debate about God's existence again, let's just assume (for the sake of my sanity) that God exists.
So yeah, just prove that God put medication in plants.
Created:
-->
@crossed
EVERY
SINGLE
DISEASE
IN
EXISTENCE...
Even if we were to take your source 100% for granted, it would only prove that certain plant ingredients, such as Oregano Oil and Olive Leaf Extract, can cure HIV. Even if we play devil's advocate and say that those plants can cure ALL diseases caused by lipid-coated viruses, you would still have all of your work ahead of you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Yup, I remember a time when people were actually lynched for being inactive, lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
No, it wouldn't. The category tick-box method would help but overall some things are so obvious anyway that I don't think you're right in saying this.
If it's so obvious, then the person making the report should have no problem explaining the offensive aspect of the report. If instead, you're talking about reports that are obviously fake, then requiring reasons for reports would eliminate them entirely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
What kind of debating are you talking about?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Oh yeah nearly forgot to mention, but for #1, 3 people (crossed, ILikePie5, and SupaDudz) voted no, not 2.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Also, just a suggestion, but maybe formatting the poll like this?
Polling (updated 1:30pm PT):
Of 10 votes total...
1. Ratify the new Code of Conduct?
7 Yes, 3 No
7 Yes, 3 No
2. Allow sharing of Private Messages?
6 Yes1, 4 Yes2, 0 No
3. Change the Voting Policy to expand S&G to include other excessive legibility issues?
6 Yes, 2 No, 2 Abstain
4. Require a reason when submitting a report?
2 Yes, 8 No1, 0 No2
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Change the Voting Policy to expand S&G to include other excessive legibility issues?
75% yes, with two people abstaining.
Wait, how can there be a 75% yes with 10 people voting? 75% would mean that 7.5 people voted yes.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
My point is that individuals don't conform to a single mindset based on skin color.
Created:
-->
@crossed
did God put medicen in plants for all disease
Every... single... disease in existence?
Yeah, no. This is nowhere near proven.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
So lying is now legally a strategy instead of a violation?
It was never a violation to begin with.
Created:
Posted in:
1. Ratify the new Code of Conduct?
Yes, although there should definitely be a separate MEEP solely for the new COC to iron out some wrinkles.
2. Allow sharing of Private Messages?
Yes2. I strongly believe that many things in the PMs should be kept private. The only reason mods should disclose private information is if the safety of the members of DART and the community as a whole outweighs the individual's inherent right to privacy.
3. Change the Voting Policy to expand S&G to include other excessive legibility issues?
No. True, there can be certain cases when the structuring of a debate argument gets to the point of impeding its meaning. However, I have never seen debates like that ever (and even if they do occur, they would be extraordinarily rare). The main concern I have with this rule is that it leaves a very wide grey area for what "well" and "poorly" structured debates look like. There are many different ways people formulate their arguments, and just because someone doesn't post an argument that looks aesthetically pleasing doesn't mean they should get punished for it.
4. Require a reason when submitting a report?
Yes. Sure, it would help the mods do their job more efficiently, but in my eyes, the main purpose of this would be to prevent abusive reporting, report trolling, accidental reporting (something which I myself have done multiple times on mobile), and any other activity in which a post gets flagged without a legitimate reason. Making the reason optional might prevent accidental reporting, but other than that would defeat the whole purpose of having a reason when submitting a report.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I am quite aware. I've been saying we need to get stuff done since DP2
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
Can you please at least provide role justification soon?
Created:
-->
@Barney
Anyone have any thoughts on the idea of requiring a reason to report a post, debate, and vote?
I think that's certainly an issue we could put onto the referendum, with 3 options:
- Keep the current system of reporting (simply clicking on a flag and sending a report)
- Having the option to make a more detailed report (thanks to RM for suggesting this idea)
- Requiring that the user write a reason for reporting
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You asked me why Democrats would be against it. Asking me why they are against it implies that they are against it in the first place.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Given this, why would Democrats say voter protections should be removed?
Here you say Democrats are against voter ID laws.
The majority of Americans, across the board, favor having voter ID (90% Republican and 66% Democrat) as a way to secure the elections from interference, both foreign and domestic.
Here you give a statistic saying that the majority of Democrats are for voter ID laws.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
What is the connection between Zok-Fot-Pik and vanilla again?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@skittlez09
Hello. Need you elaborate on your claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
DP1 i blocked pie, pie diedDP2 i blocked ragnar, ragnar died
So this is what you actually did?
Created:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
that's from your link, I stopped there since whatever questions they used seemed loaded
How so?
not to mention there is no reason as to why or if they could get the documents if they really wanted to etc
You don't know that.
can you be trained or practice to do something without a license?
I don't know what each state's driver's license programs are like, so I wouldn't be able to answer this conclusively.
ffs how many people drive without one now?
I'd imagine not very many.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
The majority of Americans, across the board, favor having voter ID (90% Republican and 66% Democrat) as a way to secure the elections from interference, both foreign and domestic.
Given this, why would Democrats say voter protections should be removed?
Notice something wrong with your statement?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
There's not a single Democrat that needs Trump to explain how to hold secure elections.Not one. At all.
The Democrats aren't the ones trying to remove mail-in voting. Trump is.
“I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office.”― Milton Friedman
The majority of Americans favor having mail-in voting as an option, across the board. [1]
Given this, why would Trump say that mail-in voting needs to be removed?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Uh, who and how?
Not going to name specific individuals, out of respect and for privacy reasons.
Doesn't debating help with their brain?
Yes, in moderation. Everything good for you is good, up to a certain threshold. If you are debating to the point where it is negatively affecting your daily life (say, going on DART instead of studying for an important exam), then it becomes a bad thing.
Unless they are sticking to trolling and turned themselves in, that is.
Not true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
But why banning themselves? Leaving the account alone is as good as a solution as anyone can come back.
I know of a few people who were addicted to DART (to the point where it was interfering with their lives) and didn't have the self-restraint to wean themselves off. Thus, they requested a self-ban so they wouldn't keep coming back.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Off the top of my head, some people request to be banned so that they can:
- Switch accounts (maybe they don't like their name, maybe they want to start anew, maybe for other reasons)
- Focus on life without worrying about DART
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
One's skin color is completely and utterly irrelevant to one's personal preferences, one's beliefs, and one's opinion on political issues.
Underneath one's skin, there's a human being.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Please explain what the connection is between this:
broke rouged lemon larch
and this:
umgah drone roleblocker
Created: