Username

One thing I've noticed about dart is that it's always been home to a lot of unique people, both in terms of their personality and systems of belief. 

People on this site tend to have very strong personalities and a lot of them just radiate confidence to the point where it seems like they are certain that they have it all figured out. This is especially conspicuous when you consider that a lot of them have views that are diametrically opposed to one another. I have never been good at projecting confidence and tend to think that self-assuredness conveys some degree of ignorance, but nonetheless it's much more interesting to speak to people who are absolutely sure about these complex views about the world than just speaking to your average joe. Everyone is different, too, in some way or another. Even the trolls tended to share that conviction, not necessarily in favor of any particular side but just in their unwavering desire to watch the world burn. 

As for the belief systems themselves a lot of them are normal if not trending towards the extreme a little bit, but also an outsized number came on here holding views that are bizarre, pattern-based, and sometimes even a little disturbed. All of these things I've been talking about are why that personality thread RM made last year got so successful, because it's really not hard to understand some aspects of people here just by looking at their forum posts and debates. Obviously, there are normal people too but normalcy actually is a little abnormal here. 

I wonder if debate websites naturally attract these eccentric kinds of people or if online forums do more broadly, though I haven't actually been to too many online forums besides this so I'm not sure. Obviously a debate website probably selects for people with strong opinions. I imagine though that most people are pretty interesting when they're allowed to slip off their IRL identities and just take up a new persona.

I just thought I'd point this out, more as a positive observation than anything else, and see other people's thoughts. This isn't me being snobby and trying to act like I'm much more normal than everyone else. In fact, I don't think I would consider myself very normal at all. For me this website has been a formative experience where I can share my learning and purge all these juvenile beliefs that I've now outgrown into the outside world. I'm much more agnostic now, on everything. 

Edit: Obviously things might've changed since it's been a while since I actively contribute here, but. Yeah. 

"And the days are not full enough

And the nights are not full enough

And life slips by like a field mouse 

Not shaking the grass" 

     - Ezra Pound, 'And the days are not full enough'

When conservatives/libertarians imply that the morality of an action depends purely on it's consequences when they say that it doesn't matter what circumstances you're in when you act, they sound pretty consequentialist. Are they aware of this, is this an unconscious thing, am I wrong, or something else? 

I see no other election thread tonight, but if someone could point me to one I'd go there. 

My summary - this early news is bad for Biden. Florida's done, Texas is going as expected (though it's still very early) , and N.C. and Georgia are pretty far gone. 

The good news for him is that Ohio might be skewed but it looks promising, and obviously wins in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania are still very feasible winning paths. Arizona too. 

Thoughts?

Hey everyone, 

I do LD and I'm planning on running a moral skepticism kritik in the future. Ofc I know that some won't take kindly to it so I'll be running it quite selectively. I had a couple questions about the concept for anyone who knows enough about debate/metaethics to answer them.

1. How do you create solvency/establish negative impacts without making moral claims? I know Nietzsche wrote some stuff about crafting orientations towards living in light of the subjectivity of morality but I'd like some more specificity here.

2. What are some common/instinctive rebuttals that you'll get if you run moral skepticism and how can you counter them? I don't know exactly what I'll be hearing yet. 

3. Any good (preferably online) resources for cards/support for nihilism/skepticism? 

Here's the report. 

"with some clients describing experiences where parts of their Fallopian tube and their ovaries had been removed while in custody."

can i do this

Or the preservation of traditional social institutions. Argued with ethang5 over this. Really curious how you could define this any differently.

It changes back when you click debates/forum.

Here: https://twitter.com/greg_doucette/status/1266751520055459847

Can't wait to hear the apologia on this one

ONLY compliments, please. It'll probably get deleted if someone gets flamed. 

It could be related to debates or not. 

Basically, the user who commented last will be the person you will compliment. Then you will become the person who commented last and the cycle will repeat. 

Hopefully this will inspire friendships and kindness on DART :)

This is just awful. We are now escalating towards war because of Trump's absurd actions and the killing of one of Iran's most important figures. 

I don't have the knowledge to set up a tournament but I think this would be a good idea. 

Basically you have to have won at least 2 debates and lost 0 non-troll debates to enter. Exceptions can be made. 

I think this would be a good idea as there are so many good debaters on this site who haven't faced each other yet, and it would certainly create some potential HOF contenders by the end. 

If you want to set up a tourney you should  strongly consider this as an idea.

Personal anecdote: I wasn't his biggest fan (I liked pretty much all of his music but I didn't follow it), but I liked that he found a unique style for himself, was very soulful, and managed to make music that sounded amazing. Robbery was  personal favorite of mine.

These days I see a lot of people who come from DDO clarifying their positions on certain issues in their bio due to the lack of "the BIG issues" section. I personally feel no need to due so, but "the BIG issues" was a very entertaining way to understand people's political stances and the reasoning behind them (which should also be included). Maybe even a short little description of each side and then the percent of people who believe in each along with a select few group of reasoning(s), although that's likely too much to ask. 

Side note: A choice for political party affiliation would be a great way to gauge an individual's partisanship. 

So y'know how DDO did that thing where if you were winning a debate it was in your win category and vice versa? 

I propose we do the same thing here. It's beneficial for debates with long voting periods. 

I explicitly outlaw kritiks in all of my debates because I thought that they were a form of semantics, and they seem bad and non-constructive, although I do not know what they are. Can someone give a simple explanation and examples of a kritik?

I am aware that he quit DDO per a forum post, is he here now? 

all time