Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
no, free press is defined totally wrong for the context.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
It's not conform or die is it?It's a case of, if you choose to not conform, be prepared to face the consequences of your own actions.I reiterate, that I am firmly in support of personal choice in this matter.Nothing fascist about supporting the freedom of the individual to choose.
Good luck without a job, not able to go to any venues, never travelling internationally and basically being a hermit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
The issue is he sends me like 1 message every 2 days, how on Earth can I negotiate terms with this guy?
Created:
Posted in:
His description says 4 rounds but the debate is 3, however that would be okay as that's replicated in others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
the deadline was today, currently he has defined objectivity as 'the quality of being objective' which is tautologous. Equally, he has defined free press as 'The freedom of news media outlets to say what they want to say.' when that isn't the case, the free press is ideological, it has an ethos not just a status.
Created:
Posted in:
To avoid tracing me IRL I will be vague but I am having a significant thing happen somewhere in the next few days and it will signficantly impact my ability to give in-depth high quality replies, it is so annoying as it would have been at a nice break/lull otherwise but then again life is all about adapting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Vaccination has already been mandatory for healthcare workers for at least three months now in UK so I'm not so sure that I am the ignorant one here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
It's a possibility, either way you have said that you are.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Yes, I have and yes, as a child it was against my will.
Would you like me to explain to you firstly how new Pfizer's and Moderna's version of vaccination is and what mRNA can do to a cell? That aside, would you like to explain why people need to be blackmailed into something?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
So should people who choose not to be vaccinated, consequently be refused medical treatment for severe Covid symptoms?This would seem fair.
Perhaps they should have to pay a fee to the NHS if they get treated depending on their tax record and income, if you mean UK specifically.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
I am actually vaccinated but I would not be happy about it passing at all.
I also think Brexit was a dogshit-reasoned idea and unacceptably close margin vote to just pass like that (48 vs 52% is fucking nothing, that shouldn't be considered a full pass or fail, it should be 55% minimum, I'd even be open to 57% minimum).
Which country are you saying would pass the mandate? I can't think of any country where over 50% support the blackmail, it's just that those that do are the loudest (specifically amongst the left-wing in particular).
Created:
Posted in:
MPs in January gave the green light to make COVID vaccines mandatory and the law set to come into effect from February 3.Fines for non-compliance can be up to €3,600.Introducing plans for mandatory vaccination, Alexander Schallenberg, the then-chancellor of Austria, said it was the only way to avoid fresh waves of the virus.
https://www.euronews.com/2022/02/01/are-countries-in-europe-are-moving-towards-mandatory-vaccination
Greece and Italy are doing it but aiming at 60+ age group for Greece and 50+ for Italy.
This is blackmail of the highest order, do not be confused, everybody 18+ in Austria is being blackmailed against their will (or with their will) to get vaccinated and inject into their body things they do not necessarily want. Let's not downplay what's happening.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Or are YOU just mandating that only YOU can decide what is and isn't mandatory.Sounds like tyranny to me.
When the fuck was there a referendum held to vote on the mandate? It's them deciding for us. Stop trying your nonsense gaslighting.
Created:
Posted in:
I would like to add the Indian news network WION
fantastic journalism I've seen and read from them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
This is an Indian take on the matter (who I think is reliably neutral and intriguing in their perspective).
Created:
-->
@Reece101
13/36
Signicantly Authoritarian.
Also question 3 is extremely realistic, in almost all cases of murder where one witness who is close to the victims remains, they end up being the one the the prosecuting lawyer represents but it depends on a lot as if they 'opt out' the state itself is obligated to prosecute in anything moderate-to-high in terms of country development.
The reason question 3 is more rare is that typically the trauma and other factors lead the witness or close relative to not want to necessariy lead the prosecution plus often they begin filing for it too late when the state itself has already done it (on behalf of the dead, think of it like that).
Created:
Posted in:
I do not agree to his definitions of Free Press, Objectivity or Advocacy, I agree to his definitions of Democracy (though too simplistic) and prioritise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
To save time and effort, please ask David to delete all definitions from the description and leave semantics as part of the debate that Con can challenge Pro on. I am open to 10k character per Round since Tejretics has that on his remake vs DL.
Created:
-->
@Incel-chud
You didn't give a single number 1-6 per answer but as you chose 'latter' for all and identify as a very Libertarian thinker, I'd say good job to my adaptation of your theory or do you disagree that this wagering is a good adaptation?
Authoritarians score low on this, Libertarians score high.
Created:
Posted in:
In other words, David has unsuccessfully given me a challenge that I can accept, especially due to the 10k per Round sheer physical limitation but also due to only providing definitions (that I disagree are accurate or in-depth enough as they all favour Pro) for the debate.
Created:
Posted in:
I blotted out Time to avoid people who don't know, to know where I am timezone-wise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Currently his challenge has 10k characters per Round
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Having posted a challenge to me at almost the very last hour that could qualify (basically), David has now created a dilemma where I need to delay as we disagree on fundamental definitions.
Created:
Posted in:
Vaccine mandates for Covid for an entire populace are tyrannical, they can twist it this way and that.
Under18s can't even get the fucking non-mRNA vaccines in these countries that are mandating them to get vaccinated, it's a sick joke.
They don't just blackmail the vaccine, they blackmail to inject experimental new age mRNA technology that's barely past the trial stage.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
yeah any time you challenge someone.
It's by design.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
challenge athias to a debate right now, it will happen for you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
I thought it would be obvious... It's not 'some problem' it would be a problem if it was visible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Winning is winning
debating for the sake of it is what the forums are for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
I might try it, if I can't find a woman.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
🤣
and this isn't a debate website
pigs can fly
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
Masking your homophobia doesn't work so well when you explicitly said this:
Homosexuality is not genetic. It comes from living in a depraved society. I might try it, if I can't find a woman.
and associated yourself with your Wylted account from the get-go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
You have a loose definition of deadline date but so do some universities and workplaces.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Please clarify how the deadline works time-wise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Isn't the deadline of 7th Feb meant to be that it's now too late?
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
I didn't contrive it, I designed it beforehand, no manipulation is taking place post-result.
Created:
3 but until I am sure I can get this it flips to 4 for the other.
I meant 3 if I'm sure I can get it or it would be 4 for the other.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
that proves the theory/system correct thus far.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
1.1
2.5
3.4
4.6
5.6
6.2
26/36, you are noticeably libertarian but within the range that is not anarchic, under the theory.
Also, question 1 was less to do with authoritarianism, more to do with transparency, you seem to be an authoritarian who doesn't highly value transparency in the system, which adds up to you picking 6 for question 4.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ComputerNerd
Yes and on Debate.org it was also where the instigator would put definitions that the other agreed to upon acceptance but here it has no bearing because that should be in the debate's long description if it's to be agreed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ComputerNerd
On debate.org, debates were never locked in until the accepting participant had posted something for Round 1, this led to many using Round 1 merely for 'acceptance'.
Created:
-->
@Intelligence_06
So, 14 or 15 out of 36, it means you're a somewhat authoritarian-leaning centrist based on the theory.
Created:
1. A lover you have partly been lied to during the entire relationship about her (or his or their) feelings, would you rather they crush you swiftly and privately and that both of you keep the drama relatively low
3
It won't be an easy choice but ultimately I would rather this, the addiction to the stringing along would become toxic for both of us.
2. A pandemic disease has reached and spread throughout your nation and the options have ultimately become an ultimatum; restricting freedoms for certain safety of the populace
Again, for me it's a 3... Not an easy decision but I am not enough of a scumbag to be okay with many in my nation dying just because I know I'd be able to survive regardless because I can live in a physical sense safe from it.
3. push forth with the uncertainty on a case where your lawyer himself/herself/theirselves is advising you to take the deal? If it goes wrong, the person may get off completely innocent.
It's overall a 5 for me. I am not about to give up just like that. This person did unthinkable shit to those close to me and needs justice to come their way. If they get away with it, I'm willing to fight further in the media even if some will take the others' side. I would hate the fame involved though but I'd endure it, I'm quite a warrior when my back is against the wall and justice is at threat.
4. There is an election between two candidates well-known for their corruption. One was secretary of state previously and proved effective but somewhat war hawk like despite keeping good relations between your nations and even their worst enemies. She is also female and her winning will set a certain precedent that your nation is open to female leadership. While her record is somewhat tainted, she is provably an effective leader and will maintain peace between your nation and the world during her term.
1, too easy of a decision to be honest, the other has no experience or stability to offer the nation. I also disagree with conservative right-wing values.
5. Rather than copy the D&D type quiz where you are pitted with a lucrative risky job and stable, boring job, I will make more clear about the ultimatum here and make the choice even more close/cutthroat. You are offered a job in the field you've always wanted to work, a lot about it is ideal but it will be brutally demanding on you in terms of not just hours but effort. You are practically guaranteed to love it but also guaranteed to be tired and need to put in 100% effort to maintain it. The wage is slightly lower than the other being offered but definitely is livable for you.
3 but until I am sure I can get this it flips to 4 for the other.
6. Do you feel ultimately more comfortable in situations of conflict between two people that are allied/close to you in different ways when it is very clear who is in the wrong, allowing you to firmly take one's side
2, overall I prefer this. I'm no coward, I can take a firm stance when it's needed. I prefer it as well as it leaves me with no inner conflict, turmoil or ambiguity over who is worth aligning with more firmly in that situation even though I like both of them.
17/36
This means I am just half way, very balanced (half of 36 is 18)
Created:
A lover you have partly lied during the entire relationship about her
By this question I meant the other has lied to you about feelings and you have caught it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
I inverted the test and gave things to weight against.
Created:
The current theory that Incel-Chud (AKA Wylted) has constructed assumes that people will answer honestly and accurately to a test that hasn't properly wagered uncertainty against suffering with certainty.
I am going to construct his same theory differently in the questioning to see if his theory is correct but questions are merely flawed.
Please answer the following as follows:
1.........strongly the former option
2....moderately f
3...........slightly f
4................slightly latter
5.........moderately l
6..............strongly l
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH HIS THEORY, instead I agree with something he suggests later on (that authoritarians, not conservatives necessarily, will score higher except I have done this test backwards so authoritarians will score lower).
I have designed my test to continuously juxtapose certain safety with uncertainty at the benefit of potential greater gain.
1. A lover you have partly lied during the entire relationship about her (or his or their) feelings, would you rather they crush you swiftly and privately and that both of you keep the drama relatively low
or that he/she/they keep(s) you in a state of uncertainty, stringing you along so that the let down is softer on your end (as you end up wanting it less) but a longer even for the both of you that most likely ends up more drama-indusive?
2. A pandemic disease has reached and spread throughout your nation and the options have ultimately become an ultimatum; restricting freedoms for certain safety of the populace
or letting them be free to mercilessly and randomly die at the hands of a disease that kills and infects with varying severity, the only certainty being it goes gentle on the very young who have no underlying issues?
3. You are given an offer from the defense on a case where you personally feel certain of the guilt of the perpetrator but rather uncertain that you can convince the Jury of their guilt. The offer is that the defendant will plead guilty but get away with it because they will snitch on another 'bigger fish' in the eye of law enforcement, at most getting community service as their penalty. Everybody in the media will believe their guilt and you will have won on a superficial front. The crime is severe, two people close to you were mutilated and abused before eventually getting killed.
Do you take it or push forth with the uncertainty on a case where your lawyer himself/herself/theirselves is advising you to take the deal? If it goes wrong, the person may get off completely innocent.
4. There is an election between two candidates well-known for their corruption. One was secretary of state previously and proved effective but somewhat war hawk like despite keeping good relations between your nations and even their worst enemies. She is also female and her winning will set a certain precedent that your nation is open to female leadership. While her record is somewhat tainted, she is provably an effective leader and will maintain peace between your nation and the world during her term.
The other is a chaotic chauvinist who is overtly anti-establishment and has espoused a lot of disciminatory and brutally offensive remarks about people of cultures that are known to immigrate to your nation, he is loathed by many internationally already and is well known to be a scumbag with playboy/infidelity tendencies and holds very little family values but is the only hope that the conservative movement in your nation has at success.
5. Rather than copy the D&D type quiz where you are pitted with a lucrative risky job and stable, boring job, I will make more clear about the ultimatum here and make the choice even more close/cutthroat. You are offered a job in the field you've always wanted to work, a lot about it is ideal but it will be brutally demanding on you in terms of not just hours but effort. You are practically guaranteed to love it but also guaranteed to be tired and need to put in 100% effort to maintain it. The wage is slightly lower than the other being offered but definitely is livable for you.
The other job seems better for you in terms of working hours vs pay and also is more recognised in general (can easier show it off to family and be prouder of it on a CV most likely) but your satisfaction at it is uncertain and the crowd there just don't quite seem your 'vibe' or type of people at a first glance. You would most likely succeed at it putting in just 72% effort and it's a very nice stepping stone for your career with only joy/satisfaction being the real risk.
6. Do you feel ultimately more comfortable in situations of conflict between two people that are allied/close to you in different ways when it is very clear who is in the wrong, allowing you to firmly take one's side
or where it is unclear who is in the right/wrong leading you to potentially piss both of them off or potentially keep both and please them?
Created: