Debater spectrum

So essentially, I have decided on a spectrum to represent debaters

I will go first. I am lean-right.

I'm literally neither. Revised version:

                       

Debate Content-Based<----------------------------------------------------> Burden of Proof Content-Based or Manipulation of the Resolution

Where are you? In the centre?

I am far left I think...you know what that means!!!!!!

Yep. You are very source-oriented. I remember you saying that I am somehow better than you at "Burden of Proof Content-Based or Manipulation of the Resolution", but you are a living example that shows that sources are needed.

And, I believe, Professional trollers like Imabench must be far-right.

Your source of video is only authleft(communism/socialism). Remember, equal rights, BLM and LGBTQ movements are still left, lib left I think.

Funny enough, I am also libcenter in the political compass test.

The leftier you are, your argument sound more like an infographic. 

The rightier you are, the more insane you sound to non-debaters.

Spectrum that has only one metric.

To be exact, I am over here.

<------------------------------------0--------------->

There should be a Y axis as well, what should the Y axis be?

Thoughts?

What if you are both contents- and structure-oriented? :O

Then you take the average. Radical centrists still exist.

I would say that Oromagi is a radical centrist in your spectrum.

What about you?

i'm just bad at debating

ooh i'm a resolution based

i don't like actually researching for debates

"Bad" yeah you beat me twice

Extreme Radical Centrist

I would say I am definitely more structure based. The thing I do is I even go beyond it because I find the holes in the structure and exploit even that, sometimes by literally forfeiting a Round for strategic alteration of the debate's structure.

So far:

Left:

Trent

Centre:

Oromagi

Press

Bearman

Right:

RM

Me

Crocodile

I don't see why the two are mutually exclusive. I could just make a line with any two traits at either end but if if the two are unrelated to eachother then little in the way of a meaningful result can be obtained. Say for example that I make a line looking at the "reddishness" versus the "greenishness" of colors according to their color decimal code. Highly different colors would appear side by side, such as black and white or brown and pink, while other colors that are different but more similar to eachother than those examples would appear further apart such as in the case of blue and magenta.

Similarly in the case of this op you would have people that focus highly on both (who would generally be considered the best debators) in the same spot in the line as people that put little effort into either and just spout a stream of consciousness (generally considered thr worst debators).

When you do both, you are considered a radical centrist.

Using a lot of sources doesn't take away from ones obsession with rigid structure in debates. I am not really structure-oriented but I am more oriented towards that than fixating over reliable sources or many of them.

In the team debate I am in with Bearman, we used many sources in our Round 1, that doesn't mean we aren't structure-oriented.

Well, those who think structure is better they are rightists, vice versa. Those who think these are equally important are radical centrists. Those who don’t debate are centrists.

They don't register lol

So if two completely opposite trait sets are on the same point of the line (center) then does that not indicate a flaw in the premise?