Total topics: 7
Hello all,
Virtuosos, blahmonkey, and I are going to experiment with a micro debate format.
These will be debates with the following conditions.
- 3 round max
- All definitions are MWD, or Wikipedia. If there is a conflict then MWD wins.
- No more than 1500 characters per round
- No more than 2 sources per round.
- 2 day max per round response
- Judging is single point, with a brief but defendable RFD.
The idea is to create shorter, snappier debates. what is interesting about this format is that you can re-debate the same topic many times and choose different attack and defense points.
We are open to suggestions for how to proceed and will modify the rules as we go to make sure it makes sense.
Anyone who would like to help out, or play along , please let one of us know.
Thanks
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Is COVID-19 evidence that we are all just part of a big stimulation and that COVID-19 is just a bug in the program?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Philosophy
The rule says.
"Full Forfeit - a debate in which a debater (or both debaters) have forfeited all or all but one of their rounds"
Therefore if it is a 2 round debate and you only answer one round, you FF.
Yet I am seeing judging that does not reflect this. What am I missing?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I have listened to the two SCOUTS cases today about Trump and his records. So fascinating listening to the arguments live instead of having to read them.
There are a few more important cases in the calendar, and I would encourage anyone with a political interest to listen in.
Did anyone else listen?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I agree with the checkpoints.
What do you think?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
I just posted my first vote. I read the rules, and then as I was reading, I realized I have to read and justify every single point. It took me an hour to read and judge one debate. Even though when I did my quick read, it is very obvious who won.
Are the voting complexities discouraging people from voting? I see a number of debates get no votes.
I doubt I am going to go through that effort again. If the rules allowed for a simpler response maybe I would.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Example:
Scripter followers Claim: God's laws, are the laws of morality.
Their Support: 10 Commandments Exodus 20:2-17 and Deuteronomy 5:6-21
My retort: Well there are lots of examples of conduct that is immoral like
Supporting slaves: Ephesians 6:5: Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Killing babies and raping woman cause your pissed off: Isaiah 13:16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated.
The Response: Either crickets or "...... you're taking it out of context. What they really mean is. we can wordsmith whatever we want to appease our agenda. Go away heathen"
WHY??
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion