Total posts: 5,875
-->
@3RU7AL
[Both of] you ought to substantiate them.
Both of who ought to substantiate what?
Created:
Posted in:
While this may be true of some religions, it certainly untrue of Christianity.Religion is an inwardly focused activity and that's what it's about.
For Christianity, focusing inwardly is the path to error and exactly what we should not do.
Created:
-->
@Athias
This is rather sophisitic. The unfalsifiable claim originated with zedvictor's question:
Can you prove that some spirituality isn't delusion?
And you answered:
All spirituality is delusional except for the spiritual followers of JESUS.
Ethang5 is not bound to substantiate the negation of zedvictor's claim, nor is Ethang5 suggesting that in the failure to substantiate your position, his position is validated. Both you and zedvictor made claims (as evidenced by the quotes.) You ought to substantiate them.
Thank you Athias! What is your IQ? It has to be astronomical. Who are you? I'm trying not to gush!
@press4Respect
It's pretty obvious that 3RUTAL was parodying what he expected to be the Christian response.
I imagine there was some sarcasm involved. Be that as it may, the suggestion is still "spirituality is delusional." In their attempts to pathologize religious belief and/or spirituality, they've resorted to making sophistic arguments. Now that they have, I ask only that they substantiate them.
My God this is good! Logically concise, clear, perceptive.
OK. This is my pet peeve with so many atheists, they so often debate the cartoon Christian in their minds, and not me.
And then they try the BoP switcharoo with you.
It gets old. Fast.
Created:
Illogical. The one making the claim bares the BoP. Can either of you prove all spirituality is delusion?
Burden-of-Proof.
Can you prove that BigFoot is false?
I would have to If I claimed BigFoot was false.
If you can't prove that BigFoot is false, then BigFoot must be TRUE!
OK. Take it up with the one making the claim about BigFoot.
The fact remains that if you claim ALL spirituality is false, you should have a logical reason for that claim. If you don't, I can dismiss the claim as unsupported.
Failure to disprove BigFoot is false DOES NOT PROVE BigFoot is REAL.
I agree, but I don't think this statement means what you think it does. Do you mean "prove" instead of "disprove"?
In science this is called an UNFALSIFIABLE CLAIM.
Then you should not have made it.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
If one said all spirituality was delusion, he certainly would be expected to back it up.One doesn't necessarily need to prove that all spirituality is delusion.
Nonetheless, the onus must fall upon the one that attempts to promote the primary concept as reality.
The onus, as always, falls on the one making the positive claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Very many people agree with you.
Would you not have gone for the money?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
How can you know there is a contradiction unless you know what the verses mean?
Words sunshine, that's how.
The meaning is in how the words are used and the order in which they are placed Shemp, not just in the words alone. Here, I'll show you.
My mother's car business ran over my bag and cracked the glass driver Wednesday taught all last summer how to buy.
Wednesday my last driver taught mother's glass how to buy the cracked summer car bag and ran my business over all.
Same words, different meaning.
One verse says different words to the other words written in the other two verses.
It's supposed to be different words genius! They are written by different authors, at different times, from different perspectives. Buy a clue man!
Or are you yet again going to put your own words and interpretations into...
Oh stop the petty lies. No one has put their own words and interpretations, much less for you to say "again". All I've done is ask you a question, and you're still dodging.
It is still not clear whether you know what the verses mean.
One gospeller writes that the women didn't tell anyone what it was they had witnessed at the empty tome and gives a reason why they didn't.
Until when? Did they never tell anyone? Did the author say? When did the story in Mark end? Did the author say?
yet two other gospellers claim that they did speak of their experience. Why are you denying this fact.
I haven't. I've denied the assumptions you're placing over the stories.
In Mark, the story ends right as the women leave the tomb. In Matthew and Luke, the story follows them to after they arrived home. So if they told others after they arrived home, only Matthew and Luke would have that account of them telling others. Easy.
Stop trying to bury these contradictory verses with stalling and filibustering and either explain them or simply admit that they are indeed what they are and always will remain: CONTRADICTIONS!
I just explained them again. Will you stupidly pretend again I didn't?
neither said they any thing to any man;
Until they arrived home Cletus! Jesus was considered a criminal against the state. The disciples were in hiding. Of course they would not say anything except to trusted friends.
Here are a few questions that will embarrass you even if you dodge them.
Q: Who did the women tell in Matthew and Luke?
A: The disciples
Q: Where were these disciples?
A: At the house.
Q: So then, when did the women tell them?
A: After they arrived at the house.
But Marks story ends before they arrive at the house! So Mark mentions that they spoke to no one running away from the tomb. You want it to mean they spoke to no one EVER AGAIN. Stupid.
It is also interesting to note here the massive contradiction from Matthew (28:9) above where he tells of the women holding Jesus' feet.
You are confused. First, more than one group of women set out to the tomb that morning. You have confused those 2 groups. Second, the WOMEN do not touch Jesus, He even tells them not to touch Him.
So in Matthew and Luke, the women rush home and tell no one until they reach home. How does that contradict Mark? The only way is for you to say Mark means they NEVER tell anyone EVER. But that isn't what the text says. That is just the lie you push.
But that is an idiots assumption. No reason for it.
These Gospel writers just cannot seem to get it together , can they?
The thing that tickles me is that these goobers actually think everyone, billions of people, missed this for hundreds of years, till they came along.
Now, watch the genius dodge the questions.... Again.
Created:
-->
@DynamicSquid
The dems will not pick the person to most likely be able to beat Trump. They will fall from in party politics, just like in 2016.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
He actually thinks nobody knows.You are actually an atheist, stop playing
Can the class say clueless?
I thought t could.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Paul
I don't think anyone knows at any time what the Doc is going to say. He's interesting and unpredictable.
I've never thought about spirituality very much and find myself wondering what it is?
I'd like to learn what exactly it is,...I am interested in all forms of spirituality,...
How do you know there are different "forms" of spirituality? For a guy who began by saying you've never much thought about it, and don't know what it is but would like to learn about it, you sure seem sure about some things about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Thanks Ragnar, I think I'll take your advice. It does appear dee dee is becoming overly agitated.
Thanks for the proactive heads up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
“EVERY WORD OF GOD IS FLAWLESS; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5)
And that is precisely why you're now stalking me, foaming at the mouth spamming loony internet froth.
You can't touch me, though you rant and rage. You are impotent and inconsequential.
So you have to crown yourself, posting nothing but self-congratulary nonsense.
The questions you dodged are still there, accusing you. The points you dodged are still there, convicting you.
No nonsense you post about how great you are, or where Jesus has sent you changes that. You are impotent against my shield.
So you rage and foam, spittle flying from your mouth. But you are inconsequential.
Other than that dee dee, you're a great guy!
Lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You haven't made any points though , have you.
No matter how many times you post this stupidity, it will never become true.
I showed you that the verses posted do not say anyone saw God. That is just your silly assumption based on ignorance.
I have asked you questions which you've dodged, ashamed that an honest answer would expose your fakery.
My rebuttals stand unaddressed. You pretend not to see them, and respam your debunked claim.
You haven't even addressed your posting fake verses. That forced me to admit those were not mistakes but lies.
The only thing people see is your dodging and running away. You are empty. A fake. A fraud. That is something I suspect did not come as a surprise to many here.
Created:
Posted in:
I offered three verses. Where one gospel writer contradicts the another two regardless of what it means to me.
How can you know there is a contradiction unless you know what the verses mean? Is your claim not that the contradiction is in the meaning?
It is what they say and how they contradict one another that concerns me,
So tell us what they say.
..and not what I believe they say or imagine what they are saying.
You seem to believe Mark says the women never spoke to anyone ever again. That is the only way you could stupidly think it contradicts Matthew and Luke.
You're asking us to just accept your claim that there is a contradiction. What IS that contradiction? Why can't you spell it out?
Because you know there is no contradiction. That's why I've had to shame you into this convo. That's why you dodge.
Stop trying to divert by asking my thoughts.
You THINK the verses contradict. It is your poor thinking that makes you believe the verses contradict. I must show you your thoughts are illogical.
I have told you clearly that they DO contradict one another.
And I have told you that they don't. What I've also done is shown you why they do not contradict. You have not shown us why they contradict. You seem to think just your saying they do, means they do.
Any idiot can say anything. Show the contradiction. If you cannot, say so.
THAT IS WHAT THEY MEAN TO ME
Atheist with article. To what does the word "that" in your comment above refer?
What it means to the author is the important thing. You thinking it is a contradiction means nothing to reality.
Show us what the author meant in Mark, and then tell us how that contradicts what is meant in Matthew or Luke.
Or you can run away and repost your debunked spam again. Your choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
You're now stalking me, @ting me in your every post, even in threads I'm not a part of, mentioning me in every post you make, even posts addressed to others, running away from questions and pretending not to see rebuttals....Get your money back if you were allegedly and professionally trained for trolls!!!! LOL! That was a great joke, we thank you for the laugh!
I think my money was well spent dee dee.
Conversely, Jesus and I are professionally trained to address your blatant bible ignorance.
Who trained Jesus goober? Lol!
Therefore, I have a "higher power" than you to perform what needs to be done while you are here at DEBATEART, understood?
I don't consider ignorance to be "higher power". You are just another dime a dozen internet troll claiming to hear voices in his head. You get treated like a troll.
When you're no longer afraid to address my points, I will listen. Till then, your rants and your bluster get treated as exactly what they are. Ignorant nonsense.
And as long as you want to confirm your ignorance, I'm game. Spam as much as you want, dodge as much as you want, the unanswered questions and the unaddressed rebuttals remain.
What you will learn about me is that your lame taunts about how I appear to the members or whether I've run away mean nothing to me.
I've beaten you... easily. That's why you're foaming at the mouth with loony caps, bolding, and underlines. That's why you keep posting old spam. You have nothing.
You're empty. A fraud. You couldn't even address the illogic in your own post, but are now white knighting dee dee. What is he? Your new Hari?
Your shtick is worn out dee dee. Try something new. You're becoming a parody of yourself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Spam doesn't make anything easier.to make it easier for you, I will now repost my posts
Therefore, you made the claim that not a single contradiction resides within Stephens passages
And you and Stephen claimed that contradictions exist. Simply posting a verse does not mean you have shown a contradiction. Show it.
the onus is put upon the person making a claim to prove this as fact,
Sure, and when you show a contradiction, I will refute it, as I have already done, and you are dodging.
You want to jump to my subsequent claim. Your claim was first. Your claim has no support. No one is going to take it on faith.
Show the contradiction or your claim gets treated like the rubbish it is.
You can run for as long as you like, but the dodged questions and the resolutions remain there. If you pretend not to see them, they don't become invisible.
Stop hiding behind dee dee. He can't protect you. Spam can't help you either. The questions you're dodging are there. The resolutions are there. Address them.
No one cares about your gaseous opinions or your spam. Address what was said to you or admit you are ignorant on the subject at hand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
Does this mean they never spoke to anyone ever again?
It doesn't say does it.
I'm asking you what the verse you offered means. Do you know?
And we cannot start arguing over what the scriptures DON'T say, can we.
No one asked you what scripture doesn't say. I'm asking what what the verse you offered means. Surely the verse means something. How can you call it a contradiction if you don't know what it means?
Or are you attempting another rewrite of these biblical documents by inserting something of your own..
All I've done is ask you what what the verse you offered means. Stop running and tell us what the verse means.
You seem to be stupidly saying that the women never spoke to anyone ever again. Could you be that dense?
What is does do though is CONTRADICT both Mark & Luke. Matthew 28:8-9 King James Version
How? You can't even say what the verse means. I've given you a resolution, you pretend you don't see it. I ask you a question, you dodge it. Why?
You want your claim accepted without question?
If you won't answer questions about your claim of a contradiction, and cannot tell us what the verses you offered mean, I can blow off your claim as the babbling of a moron.
Stop telling us your opinion and post something sensible for a change, instead of reposting your already debunked claim.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hey dee dee, as I told you, you're just some dweeb on the net who claims to speak to God. Your propositions mean nothing. I can blow them off.You ran away once again from proposition #1 in my post #11,
Don't just call my rebuttal an "inept comparison" without explaining. No one is here for your opinions.
Just as my posting different numbers of stars on our flag does not mean a contradiction, neither does you posting different numbers of women at the tomb mean a contradiction.
Why is it a contradiction dee dee? No one here is going to take you on faith. Say something intelligent.
let's try this once again
No sir. You can play stupid on your own time. Address my rebuttal and answer my questions. If you cannot, say so.
I told you that your inept opinions DO NOT take precedent over Jesus' true words, get it?
Jesus saw no contradiction, and He was there. I gave no opinion, I posted fact and asked you a question. You dodged.
Did you think you wouldn't have to answer any questions about your post? Did you believe simply posting a verse was enough? Buy a clue dee dee.
The membership is watching
So is Jesus, to whom you claim to speak.
Created:
Posted in:
Have any of you ever noticed how the lefts problems are always what "might" happen? What a conservative "might" do. What a law "might" mean?
Right now dems are actually trying to impeach the president on what he "might" have meant.
They will propose changing laws (a 12 year old can have an abortion without parental approval) because the pregnancy "might" be due to her father.
Kavenaugh should not become Supreme court judge because he "might" rescind Row vs Wade.
This is the logical end of a morality based on pleasure. What liberal democrats like, becomes what is moral.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
No you haven't dee dee. You've run like a hooker from an undercover cop.I have answered your questions,...
You post these long things saying nothing. No one cares about your opinion of me, or how many times you declare yourself the winner.
Address the topic. Make some sense. Posting the same silliness over and over is dumb. You claim to be bright.
If Jesus sent you, why do you run away from questions? Jesus Himself never ran away.
You @ me in every post you make, even in threads I'm not in, and then will run away when I ask you questions about your lame post you alerted me to!
Does that make sense to you dee dee?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hey dee dee,
You may be becoming obsessed so this is a friendly heads up.
Stop @-ting me in every posts you defecate. I have nothing to do with your spam to others. You already mention me in every post you make.
I have experience with confused obsessed posters. Your pal banned was one such. Don't let the bitterness eat you up man. It will consume you if you allow it.
Don't take it personally. I was expertly and professionally trained for trolls. I'm just doing my job, your obsession is misplaced dee dee.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Don't you have any new material? Your silliness gets old fast. Stop telling us your opinion and post something sensible for a change dee dee.You continue to remove one foot....
Does this mean they never spoke to anyone ever again, or that they said nothing to anyone at the grave site or on the way back home?"
Answer the question great Christian who talks to Jesus. Just like the fake Stephen, you can post the question, but will run away from answering it.
Hey genius, if you post the question, you look like a loser when you dodge it. If you're going to run away from answering, don't post the question. Yeesh.
2. There first came to the tomb on Sunday morninga. one woman (John 20:1)b. two women (Matt. 28:1)
c. three women (Mark 16:1)d. more than three women (Luke 23:55-56; 24:1,10)
Let me give you something you can run from too.
Do you know the Gospels were written independently of each other?
Did you know each one has a focuses on specific people?
Did you know each gospel is the account of a specific person?
Of course you don't. The internet allows basically ignorant bumpkins to have a voice. Consider this.
From Union Jack to Stars and Stripes
Pub: 1820. Page 39 - "...but how would 17 stars look on such a flag? To this author, anything more than 15 would be unseemly".
The American Cauldron
Pub: 1849. Page 126 - "...the american flag has 48 stars..."
Was Alaska Worth It?
Pub: 1984. Page 97 - "...at first rejected a flag with 50 stars, before being convinced by an actual flag..."
How many stars are there on the flag?
Ignorant bumpkins would call this a contradiction. Especially if I printed all 3 in one volume called "The Bible".
Please, you say you speak to Jesus who was at that tomb. As Him instead of posting garbage that expose your ignorance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Yeah supa, I'm the deluded one. You don't sound deluded at all. Don't know what I was thinking.
Lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Here are more questions you can run from Cletus.
neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.
Does this mean they never spoke to anyone ever again, or that they said nothing to anyone at the grave site or on the way back home?
You stupidly want it to be that they never spoke to anyone ever again. Where is your brain?
Or do you think that when atheists who don't even know the bible agree with you, that means you're right?
Your "contradictions" are lame, and only highlight your poor reading comprehension and low integrity.
The account in Mark ends with them leaving the tomb having spoken to no one, the other accounts follow them to later when they tell the others after they get back home.
Where is the contradiction? In your mind only, because you're too dull to read properly, and assume too much.
OK. I'm done, you can dodge and repost your lame post now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I was talking to you, not dee dee.
You've run and dodged. And lied.
I doubt now if you've ever talked to Jesus. You're too fake to be talking to Him.
When you can answer the questions you're running from, I'll be here.
In the main time, stop posting phrases and lies as verses. Other people have bibles too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Castin was a mod before she stepped down
Castin didn't exactly step down.
I am a Conservative
No, you're not.
I am Orthodox Christian
That you certainly are not.
Speed is African American
Speed isn't in the clique
By middle age, I mean older moderators
Lol. Nice try.
Bench is DDO elite.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Abraham Lincoln did this with his campaign in the 1860s.
Abraham Lincoln had homosexuals in his mod team??
The moderation team is extremely diverse from middle age to teenagers from gay to straight. We have good variety. From military service to creative, a variety of sides makes our moderation team work efficiently.
Any women? Any conservatives? Any African Americans? Any Christians? 30's is middle aged?
Who's the straight mod?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sylweb
I dealt with your objections in my previous posts.
The conservative makes the better arguments.
Well, the voters decide who make the better argument. If you can just ignore the voters, why have them vote at all?
3 people vote for the conservative and 2 for the liberal. All 5 people happen to be conservative. The conservative loses 3-4.
As he should. The liberal convinced two people with an opposing view. That is how weighted votes work.
A better system might be to make the voting system easier with web 2.0 technologies.
That is an innovative idea! And I know Mike would love it... but the work it would take, and the difficulty of getting voters to understand and use the system would be counter-productive.
The simple weighted voting system does the same thing without the tech whiz bang. And we can always implement the the more technical system at a later date when Mike has more time.
If we do choose to implement this idea, it should be on an opt-in basis.
I agree.
Created:
Posted in:
Which arguments that i made against RM have been weak in your opinion?
The only 2 I've seen you offer. The apparent change in the circumference of the sun if the claims of flat Earth are true, and eclipses.
You are right of course, but both are very weak arguments.
The best way to beat a flat Earther, is to find a scientific principle he agrees is true, like for example, why droplets and bubbles are spheres...
As a planet gets massive enough, internal heating takes over and the planet behaves like a fluid. Gravity then pulls all of the material towards the center of mass (or core). Because all points on the surface of a sphere are an equal distance from the center of mass, planets eventually settle on a spherical shape.
And then have him explain a flat Earth claim that contradicts the very scientific principle he has agreed is true.
He defeats himself.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You haven't made any points though , have you.
Then why are you running away? Why have you dodged my questions?
Did you think you would post some fake verses and that would be it, with no challenges and no need for you to defend what you posted? Surprise!!
The facts are on my side.
The only thing on your side is the spam you keep posting.
You can't answer my questions because you're a fraud. A fake.
You post fake verses because you are fake. A fraud.
And every time you spam the same silliness again instead of addressing the questions and points in my rebut, you show again you are a fraud, a fake.
I can point that longer than you can run.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Nemiroff
It is not impossible, just very unlikely.
You said, everything happens to face us dead on.
That is impossible.
I demonstrated that things can face us in a fixed position, not the rest of those concepts.
Only a body that revolves around the earth can have one side always facing Earth. The sun cannot.
I am not a flat earther.
I know.
I agree it is a silly concept overall, but whether i take the debate seriously depends more on my opponent then the subject.
Noble of you.
Besides, i believe i have a iron clad argument against it,
Your argument against so far has been weak. RM would beat you in a debate.
i want to try it on a non agitated opponent please :)
Lol OK. But RM will have to find a way to remain non agitated on his own, because I'm going to keep posting what I think.
Good luck!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Race SHOULD HAVE nothing to do with moderation what so ever.
I was stating what was, not what I wanted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
OK SupaDudz, we can't tell that you're young, white and male. My bad.
Apologies.
Created:
Posted in:
Not just unlikely, impossible. Also, if the moon is a disk facing Earth, then the flat surface facing Earth is always turned away from the sun, what starlight is it reflecting? It should be invisible from Earth....but it is very unlikely everything happens to face us dead on.
And we know that the sun is rotating. How does it always appear a disk to us? If it is flat, what happens to the sunspots that move past the edge?
What force keeps broiling sun of superheated gas a disk? It's all to infantile to take seriously. I don't debate them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hey dee dee,
Making an entire post repeating what I said to you is silly. Especially if you post what I said and then never address it.
Answer my questions.
If you cannot, say you cannot.
If you are stalling for time until you meet Jesus again, don't worry. I'll wait.
Tell Jesus I said "hi" when you see Him again. Be alert though, He probably won't like that you fibbed a quote of his. I hear He's a stickler for honesty.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
One that immediately comes to mind, is peoples addiction to complaining.
We're never going to stop the complaints, and that isn't the aim of weighted voting anyway. So we get the same complaining, but a better, more inclusive system.
They would cry at someone else having given the other side one more point than them, not all votes are equal, blah blah blah
Of course they will, but, just like Hillery and the electoral college, everyone knew and agreed to the rules before the voting. Such complaints can be ignored.
Another problem I do foresee is increased complaints over fakers, in addition to complaints like... Ragnar's not a liberal, he's a progressive, his vote should do this instead...
This is a good point, but that can be put to rest if we set up the rules properly, so that everyone is clear on which positions do what, and the points each position gives to any other position.
So the case of "A vote by a conservative for a conservative gets the conservative debater one vote point." Wouldn't always make sense, when the conservative debater is arguing against a conservative viewpoint...
First, if the conservative is playing devils advocate, he is likely to get fewer conservative votes and more nonconservative votes (vice a versa for the liberal), but he is probably going to be less comfortable arguing against his natural position and thus will be less convincing. It balances out. We are trying to get members to vote on the arguments and not on their political leanings. One side playing devils advocate would be great for that.
But due to political positions having to be stated, no one could play devils advocate incognito.
I don't think this will be a major or even a common issue in a weighted system.
You have given this thought! : )
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
@zedvictor4
@zedvictor4
Illogical. The one making the claim bares the BoP. Can either of you prove all spirituality is delusion?Can you prove that some spirituality isn't delusion?
(As soon as the person tries to shirk the BoP, I know I'm dealing with an ideologue.)
@3RU7AL
Do you consider that statement a fact or an opinion?
I consider it both.
All spirituality is delusional except for the spiritual followers of JESUS.
When you make comments like that, please let the readers know that is your belief, not mine.
Debate me, not the christian caricature in your head.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I am not a DART Mod, I am a Discord Mod.
Doesn't matter. You were picked by the clique.
Big difference. I do not have a crown on my head.
You mean the crown avatar? Really? That's the big difference?
Do you think they thought about only when the discord mod position came up? You were in their sights from the time they learned you were young, white, and male.I also wasn't truly recognized til about June 2019 and still my votes were not being taken down
Please.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
He seems like the type who doesn't want to lead, but still thinks everyone should follow him.How about you lead by example? :)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It would make them harder to do, and easier to diffuse.I'm not sure this would do anything to stop vote bombs.
It wouldn't be bickering because you can't win if you alienate your opponent.
It would be endless bickering after the inevitable tie vote. And people would stop looking at debates because the will know they will all result in ties.
Another option would be to have both debaters nominate voters in round one with each side having veto power over all nominated voters.
That is an option, but I fear often we won't have enough voters for debates and it is even more complicated than a simple weighted voting system.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
What are you attempting to prove, that the bible validates you?
If you believe what some loony website has told you, what is it to me? Knock yourself out.
If you think heavenly bodies like the moon and the earth, formed in space from coalescing dust into non-spherical shapes, or that the sun, which is not solid, is any shape in space other than a sphere, go ahead.
My only interest here was that the bible not get dragged into this nonsense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
You're letting others tell you about what's in the bible. You know very little about it. But you are free to believed anything you want about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
It would be more competitive and more interesting and more civil.
I strongly disagree. It would be exactly like the forums,unending bickering.
So if someone had "Christian" selected in their profile...
No, only political positions. As for the rest of your questions, I addressed them in my post on page 1.
Created:
Posted in:
True, but slagging through the ties would be boring and probably not increase voting.A lot of ties would just make the wins more valuable.
Any position is OK. Not just those 2.What if someone doesn't consider themselves a conservative (OR) a liberal?
And as long as you had two friends for every one enemy vote, you could still bulldoze your way to the top of the charts.
But it would be much harder to do. Right now, all you need is one friend.
For me, the fact that the clique hates it is reason enough to think it has merit.
Created: