Total posts: 1,007
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@Savant
Barney, would you be up to debate Savant about the morality/ethics of abortion?
I debated him on the same subject a while ago. I think it might be interesting to see a discussion crossover between the two of you.
Created:
Posted in:
I want to set up a thread where two people can freely discuss here and arrange to debate each other. It can be any topic the two mutually agree upon. If you have someone you want to debate, feel free to tag them here.
(The terms of the debate can be rated, standard, multiple choice criterion, winner selection, or judicial decision.)
This isn't for any Tournament.
(Do not tag someone if there is a potential risk of derailing this thread into hostility.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stephen,
YOUR QUOTE THAT SHOWS HOW BIBLE-STUPID CHRISTIANS ARE: "The age of the earth."
Look at the foolishness of these bible-inept pseudo-christians! They don't have the sense to feel embarrassed regarding their ignorance, so me and Jesus will continue to make them look silly in these forum threads.
They don't even read their own bible because here it clearly states!:
Ecclesiastes 1:4, “A generation goes and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.”
Created:
Posted in:
at snail speed with 'you need to prove the collusion that happened in private'.
It would definitely make sense to enable Judicial Decision with rated debates.
Created:
Posted in:
With the majority disapproval of updates that took away noob-sniping and some former voters having frustration with their privileges taken away, it seems people are still voicing criticisms of my troll debates.
We have two problems.:
- Many people here seem to want noob-sniping.
- Despite there being a quantity of veteran and experienced voters, there aren't enough of them to accommodate the amount of rated debates needing votes.
So there are only two solutions to this.:
Here is the first,
My Troll debates solve this problem in two ways.:
- They give new debaters the option to vote on debates, and such a privilege also encourages them to participate more, both in debates and voting.
- It also gives them the qualification to take part in Rated Debates, thus making them eligible for noob-sniping.
So here, I have already successfully killed two birds with one stone using this same method repetitively for all noobs that join the site.
The Cons, however.:
- Incompetent votes. (Subject to mod removal, so not a problem really.)
- Vote-bombing. (They could choose to reward certain people with all the points rather than judging objectively, but mods can also discipline them as they decide. So this mitigates the risk.)
Here is the second solution.:
Enable Judicial Decision on Rated Debates. It's really THAT simple.
Forget the potentiality of debaters cheating the system to get Elo through deliberately choosing biased judges. Each debater has the ability and option to select their own judges. Even if a debate is judicial decision, allow votes to be regulated by mods anyway so they can delete if either debater is cheating.
Created:
- Combat Sports. (MMA & Kickboxing.)
- Andrew Tate & The Paul Brothers.
- Movies/TV Shows.
- The Presidential Election.
(But ask me again in a few months and these options are liable to change.)
Created:
-->
@Double_R
If you don’t have evidence to support your position then that right there is your problem. But beyond that these are things you need to learn to handle. People will try to knock your case down with logical fallacies all the time, you’ve got to learn how to identify them and properly call them out.The way I see it is if that’s what my opponent is lowering themselves to that means they’re losing and can find no other way to defeat my case.
Rational says he uses that as a tactic in his debates.
Created:
Posted in:
I disagree to that too. However, I cannot proceed without completely roasting him and he would only retaliate in kind.He does not suit leadership as anything. He suits being a site user who doesn't give a shit well. I actually think people see me as what I see Oromagi as but they are wrong about me. I never ever have been given a chance to prove that yet. I'd need one role, one chance and it would be proven.
If you're really this persistent.
There is a way for you to become President.
Created:
Posted in:
oromagi would definitely be perfect as President.
The moderator role isn't suitable for him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
I have no reason to believe he would even care.
Whiteflame is the only one who can do anything about it at the moment.
The site owner is rarely online and gives the site freedom to do whatever they want.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
How would you have them moderate?
Like whiteflame or Barney.
If someone violates the rules, send them a dm warning them to stop and act accordingly, if they don't.
oromagi has done precisely the exact opposite.
- Posting publicly about Best.Korea's comment while pretending to play neutral while secretly taking his message out of context and allowing the community to scrutinize him.
- Publicizing personal mod issues by calling out BrotherD.Thomas out and openly.
- Putting Greyparrot on blast by once again, publicizing private mod info by warning him to cease a nickname he created for IWRA. While simultaneously ignoring the repeated insults of IWRA and doxxing of Greyparrot's RL career. (Favoritism and hypocrisy.)
But then repeatedly engaging aggressively with TWS by calling him personalized nicknames he came up with, and addressing him as a racist and a transphobe, insulting his intelligence. As well as engaging in cross-thread contamination.
If you think it's just the users that are frustrated with oromagi's actions, consider for a moment that the mods themselves are getting tired of it also.
It's not THE mods. It's the actions and behavior of one mod. Also, keep in mind that I was the one who tried convincing former president Wylted to make oromagi a moderator and the one who wanted oro as a mod. Of all people, Wylted warned this was a bad idea.
Oro has a history of making callout threads too. So just keep that in mind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405_2
Athias is actually pretty chill. Like Savant and Slainte-level chill.
That said, if anyone’s going to be a mod. I’d rather them have the temperament of whiteflame and Barney.
Getting into fights with your own community and being hypocritical sets a bad precedent for future mods.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405_2
So you agree that I'm right then.
Created:
Posted in:
Every attribute you described of Kamala Harris is stronger in both DeSantis and Trump, do we agree on that?
Not by a long shot.
I have my own characterizations of DeSantis and Trump and where their attributes falter.
Would you prefer Biden, Harris, Trump or DeSantis?To me it's Harris by far.
100% DeSantis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405_2
Created:
Posted in:
He never actually apologised, never was punished, never anything since they even promoted him to deputy moderator.This guy knows how to source-spam and chokehold the opponent by taking the more peer-reviewed side of any debate source-wise and hammers home victories like that. Oromagi is 'invincible' until he isn't, as a mediocre debater namedFruit_Inspector showed him.I just realised you can no longer filter won vs lost vs tied debates in someone's profile.
I don't see any issue with that. In debating, anything is fair game.
Great debaters lose to incompetents all the time.
If he plays dirty while debating, I couldn't care less.
My major concern is he and TWS are two sides of the same coin. They're both hyper-aggressive drama queens who have a habit of derailing forum threads just so they can lash out at each other. But the real problem is that oro is a drama queen with power and that's objectively WORSE! If he wasn't a moderator, what would there be for me to complain about?
With great power, comes great responsibility.
And oromagi wields that power with the emotional stability of an entitled white woman.
Created:
Posted in:
What do you define competence as?
I define competence as meeting the minimal qualifications or having the ability to perform a job, according to professional expectation.
Many of our previous Founding Fathers have done great and terrible things. Because a lot of their achievements, they raised the standard of what an ideal president should be. But because of knuckleheads like Trump and Biden, they also lowered the threshold significantly.
The job of the President should be to maintain or improve the stability and safety of our economy, as well as manage the federal government. There are plenty of qualified black female candidates that meet the criteria for President. Kamala Harris does not for several reasons.:
- She is a grifter. I might be willing to give her the benefit of the doubt if she was authentic about her beliefs, but the fact is she doesn't give a damn about the nation or the people, she's concerned about having people support her.
- She is a snake. She was the worst choice for VP by Joe Biden. She has no loyalty to him and would openly condemn him if the left-wing media incentivized her to because of peer pressure. She has no moral compass and even if she personally liked Biden, it would not stop her from turning on him in a heart-beat.
- She is an evil person. Her history as a prosecutor had her pressing charges against plenty of nonviolent drug offenders and deliberately tried to withhold evidence that would've gotten people exonerated. (Here is the interview where she brags about these things.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgWZJZcwpnY
- She is incompetent. I mean this in two ways. 1. She's under-qualified for the role of president because of her inexperience in politics or economics and her education would make her a terrible fit. 2. She would undermine the very integrity of what being a President means and has not demonstrated the capacity that she even understands what a President does or what they're supposed to do.
Case in point, you REALLY don't want Kamala Harris as President.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Not offensive enough to constitute a CoC violation, and I highly doubt anyone gets penalized for lameness and unoriginality.and yet those are the worst crimes! 🤣
In GP's defense, I thought I was being hilarious when I called Rational "Rat-Man," but it turns out that nickname for him has been around longer than my account.
I also thought I was being really funny when I referred to Polytheist as "Mary Poppins," or BrotherD.Thomas as "BrainDead.Tumor"
The same is also true for GP with "Military LARPER" or "Fanchick."
Just as I'm sure oro assumed he was really clever with these obscure boomer references nobody gets.
Created:
Posted in:
Ignoring everything else, I think this alone is one of many examples of hypocrisy in its purest form being displayed by Oromagi.This alone is proof of irrefutable double-standard BS that he has functioned with ever since he told me he would electrocute my testicles to torture me, as a nonconsented, uninvited 'banter' remark in a Mafia game here and got away completely unscathed.
Well, that's a shocker.
What do you mean by unscathed?
Might be slightly unethical for whiteflame to administer testicular-specific electroshock therapy as a disciplinary method every-time one of his mods lash out over a game of Mafia.
That said, I wouldn't feel comfortable with a moderator running around threatening to fry my balls either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
I don't know where fanchick came from or what it is meant to suggest. I missed the origin story of that particular meme and would probably not have minded its giddy repetition so much with some context.
The origin of the name “Fanchick” is from an old thread where I addressed IWRA as a “Roosevelt Fangirl” to imply he was a stan for the former president.
Greyparrot only changed it slightly and immortalized it in the forums as a running gag, as retaliation for constant baiting from IWRA. GP only applied context for it once, which was different from mine. Originally, he was labeling IWRA as “fanchick” to mean he was obsessed with MSNBC.
I’m sure it was meant to be “insulting,” but it was really just a cheaper knockoff of one of my unclever names.
If GP didn’t explain the context to you, it’s not because of a deliberate attempt to conceal the offensiveness of an inside-joke.
It’s because GP failed to establish a consistent definition for the word that it changed too often, to the point that it lost its appeal and became meaningless and the punch-line just fell flat because GP couldn’t decide what the joke actually meant.
Any efforts to keep the nickname going was just a desperate attempt on his part to trigger IWRA. (He’s called IWRA worse names, but Fanchick is the only one he stuck with.)
Not offensive enough to constitute a CoC violation, and I highly doubt anyone gets penalized for lameness and unoriginality.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Pejorative nicknames.
oh, shit. Who triggered wet Archie Bunker this time?
Personal attacks.
TWS, you keep saying that your bigotry has not been substantiated on this site but you are the only one who believes that and you are a fool.
Let's agree that heretoforward it is a sufficiently established fact that TWS1405 is a bigot and a racist. The only thing that change that fact is TWS.
And cross-thread contamination.
Just as you assumed the other day that a French teenager was a criminal and an immigrant and a drug addict based exclusively on your misperception of skin color, your hasty generalizations about all LGBTQIA+ is a perfect example of how you lump every OTHER you're too dumb to relate to into some kind of frightening enemy. Not all LGBTQIA+ think the same about Trans people. Hell, look at Jerry Falwell.
I’m not following your logic here, oromagi.
As far as I’m concerned, your accusations of homophobia, transphobia, and racism may very well be justified.
It’s not the insults or personal attacks I’m objecting to. It’s your double standard when it comes to modding.
Which raises the question.:
- How is it that inoffensive nicknames are declared unacceptable and rise to the standard of harassment, but then repeatedly engaging with TWS’s posts on such an aggressive and personal level is okay to you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@whiteflame
Even if TWS's behavior is questionable.
Do the current attacks by oromagi warrant action by the Enforcement or are they still within the scope of being considered acceptable?
Created:
Posted in:
My intuition also tells me the links posted by Vegasgiants are fake.
Check into them and let me know what you find.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
@ADreamOfLiberty
@Vegasgiants
As a self-proclaimed expert on the Global Warming hoax, I can certainly say it is the only myth that society and science bends backwards deeply for.
The fraud Wallace Broecker wanted to fabricate something so that politicians could rob its citizens of money by taxing them extra for these bogus policies, so he fabricated the end of the world and named the phenomenon, "Global Warming."
They also did something similar back in 1969 when they staged the Moon Landing.
Created:
-->
@TWS1405_2
What about South Korea?
Created:
-->
@TWS1405_2
Isn't it worse in South Korea though?
Created:
Poor Barney is gonna catch a lot of crap for this. 😂
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
What roles do offense and defense play in a debate?
Do Constructives = Defense, Rebuttals = Offense?
Created:
Posted in:
One of the things I am most skilled at in debating is making both sides seem shitty, both sides seem absolutely dogshit rolling in the mud type stuff where I make my case clearer and some taboo techniques that border on gaslighting that are simply absolutely necessary arsenal and what even whiteflame and such do in debates regularly.
Does gaslighting normally entail confusing the opponent by misrepresenting their arguments, so it's unclear to them exactly what they are discussing?
I've seen it done before, I was just curious.
Created:
Posted in:
- The peak of any debate performance is knowing enough about the subject to be able to argue both sides competently.
Do you believe that’s accurate? If not, what do you think drives the best quality of a debate?
And I’ll throw out another question.
- Are polymaths technically savants over a variety of subjects or are they just jacks of all trades?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mps1213
Alright RM, I apologize for giving you shit. Kind of being a douche for no reason. I’m trying to be less toxic in life, the internet brings it out of me. The opioids I took made me think twice about our conversation and made me realize I’m being toxic for no reason.
I'll have what you're having.
Created:
Posted in:
Never on any website have I ever seen so many whiny bitches - starting with you know who!!!
Who? 🤔
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
@Mps1213
Sorry you are super genius to spot this. MPS was my sissy partner for a while while I explored my bi side, that's one of the lower IQ exes.All of this is sarcasm, please don't shoot me.
Everyone is visibly cringing at your embarrassing attempts at being funny.
This line isn't even remotely clever or offensive enough to reach the mod's radar.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note...
How can people feel so confident to make personal attacks behind their illusion of security after crying they were getting bullied?
Makes ZERO sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Are you familiar with Destiny, Vaush, or Hasan?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Hey, I should have tagged you when I made this post.
When did your interest in debate begin?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mps1213
I'm a published author too and a former writer.
I understand you aren't interested in debate for the sake of debate itself, but I really think you have a lot to offer if you did, potential-wise.
You turned down some of the invitations to be a judge on debates in the past, so I was glad when you accepted to be a judge in my Tournament.
Since your goal is to convince people of drug legalization, an effective way to do this would be for you to recreate the debate (either making it heroin-specific or all psychoactive substances) with your choice in judges but then to switch sides, so you would be arguing for drug prohibition and I would be arguing for legalization.
I realize this seems unorthodox, but there is a purpose here.
- When people are personally chosen to be judges, they pay more attention to the debate.
- Arguing against your beliefs will actually make you stronger at defending them because your experience will allow you to see Drug Prohibition arguments coming a mile away.
- Having someone else defend your beliefs is actually an effective way of increasing engagement of the subject because it's exposure to the same idea but with a different perspective.
Created:
Posted in:
RMM.
Do you think debate styles have category-specific types? Like MBTI.
Created:
Posted in:
I was born to argue, born to critically think and challenge.I came to realise that I need a high IQ spouse no matter what. I can't last long-term with someone who can't appreciate that side of me, it just makes friction. There's also no way to say 'you're too unintelligent' in a nice way, I have been told my intellectual needs and ranting make me incompatible before, though, some have even said I'm just too smart.Debating is an innate part of me. I am not just a nerd who can do nerdy stuff at the day job and come home and turn my brain off, in everything I like to think generally speaking, it can even be intimacy but also just hobbies. I can get along with less intelligent people, yes. I can't fully feel that electric 'fuck I dig you so hard' vibe let alone this true love vibe and it is a problem as I can feel a crush and feel loved (well, not all of me, that's the point) but start to feel dead inside myself.I can have less intelligent or stimulating friends but for a lover, it's definitely a requirement. She needs the spark, the urge to debate sure but that's not as important, just the spark to talk back.
So debate to you is more personal than recreational.
I have similar romantic preferences for myself.
Created:
Posted in:
Did this site make you better at debating IRL?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
@Bella3sp
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vegasgiants
It’s a myth that bacon causes cancer.:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vegasgiants
Sidewalker is an entrepreneur with a networth of $100 million.
Perhaps it isn’t wise to mock him for his superior knowledge on the subject.
Created: