Total topics: 50
At the moment, the website implements only the core functionality which is extremely limited and "naive". But it doesn't mean that it's going to stay that way. Our main goal is to develop a platform that'd be interesting for as many people as possible and for that to happen, we need your help.
So, what's the plan? Well, we split the development work into 2 categories, "basic" and "requested". The basic one is implementing the most obvious and needed features. For example, at the moment, it's still impossible to delete or edit some entities on the website, such as forum posts, so it goes to the basic category. The other example would be adding a bunch of minor features, such as comment likes, "hot" and "pinned" forum topics and etc. The other category is about implementing more unique and interesting features, such as user guilds or video debates or some other debate formats or whatever else would be interesting for the community.
Also it's worth pointing out that this website is not backed by any company and we don't have thousands of dollars of investments raised. Frankly, we don't have any money except for our own. At the moment, we have 2.5 developers working on it in their free time. Even though it means a bit slower development process, at the same time it gives us ultimate freedom to go any way we want. We don't need to satisfy anyone outside of our community.
So, if you want to help us turn this website into something you've always wanted for a debate platform, welcome on board :)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
This is the new moderation log that will be replacing the old one. This thread is a log on ongoing bans, bother permanent and temporarily, which were effectuated on or after October 29, 2019. Not included in this log are bans impacting accounts which were created exclusively for commercial advertising or spam-related purposes. The information given for each kind of log is clearly stated below:
- Entries of permanent bans will state the date the ban was effectuated and provide a brief (not more than 500 characters) summary of why the user was permanently banned
- Entries of temporary bans will state the length of the ban and the date the ban was effectuated
- Entries of bans by request (i.e. bans a user requested be applied to their own account) will state the date the ban was effectuated.
- Entries of closed multi-accounts (i.e. old accounts of otherwise active users) will state the date the ban was effectuated.
As the new chief moderator, my goal is to make the moderation team more transparent with our process. Additionally, we believe that debaters expect their opponent to be able to finish their debates and will naturally be curious when someone is banned. I am moving the ban log from the miscellaneous section to the DebateArt.com section to make this thread more transparent and easier to see.
The moderator who made the ban ruling will also be included in all entries. Moderation will not offer public comment on the reasons for temporary bans unless and until either (a) the banned user returns and raises the issue publicly or (b) public interest outweighs the banned user's privacy concerns.
If you have any questions as to why someone was banned, please refer them to this post.
If you are banned and want to appeal your ban, please email us at [email protected].
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The immortal soul is a pagan concept. Soul comes from a root word which means to bind. Superstitious pagan peoples would bind the hands and feet upon burial to prevent the dead from harming the living. The word evolved into a similar meaning always associated with large bodies of water (the sea) for the same reason. It was thought that the immortal souls were confined in large bodies of water, preventing them from bothering the living.
When translating the Bible from the Hebrew and Greek to English the word soul would be problematic due to it's pagan roots. However, it was the closest word we had. The Hebrew nephesh and the Greek psykhe are the Biblical terms translated into soul. The Hebrew word comes from a root that literally means "breather." The Greek word has a similar meaning. It means life and all that involves. A living being. That can be somewhat complicated by the usual obstacles, like variation in the the use of the word. Greek philosophers or modern day psychiatrists use the Greek word psykhe corresponds to the Hebrew word nephesh (nefesh, etc.)
The soul, according to the Bible, that is, nephesh or psykhe, is mortal, destructible.
Compare translations Ezekiel 18:4: "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins, he shall die." (WEB)
Compare translations Matthew 10:28: "Don't be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." (WEB)
Journal of Biblical Literature (Vol. XVI, p. 30): "Soul in English usage at the present time conveys usually a very different meaning from נפש [ne′phesh] in Hebrew, and it is easy for the incautious reader to misinterpret."
The New York Times, October 12, 1962: H. M. Orlinsky of Hebrew Union College states regarding nefesh: "Other translators have interpreted it to mean 'soul,' which is completely inaccurate. The Bible does not say we have a soul. 'Nefesh' is the person himself, his need for food, the very blood in his veins, his being."
New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, V:ol. XIII, p. 467): "Nepes [ne′phesh] is a term of far greater extension than our 'soul,' signifying life (Ex 21.23; Dt 19.21) and its various vital manifestations: breathing (Gn 35.18; Jb 41.13[21]), blood [Gn 9.4; Dt 12.23; Ps 140(141).8], desire (2 Sm 3.21; Prv 23.2). The soul in the O[ld] T[estament] means not a part of man, but the whole man—man as a living being. Similarly, in the N[ew] T[estament] it signifies human life: the life of an individual, conscious subject (Mt 2.20; 6.25; Lk 12.22-23; 14.26; Jn 10.11, 15, 17; 13.37)."
The New American Bible Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms (pp. 27, 28): "In the New Testament, to 'save one's soul' (Mk 8:35) does not mean to save some 'spiritual' part of man, as opposed to his 'body' (in the Platonic sense) but the whole person with emphasis on the fact that the person is living, desiring, loving and willing, etc., in addition to being concrete and physical."
Koehler and Baumgartner's Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden, 1958, p. 627) on nephesh: "the breathing substance, making man a[nd] animal living beings Gn 1, 20, the soul (strictly distinct from the greek notion of soul) the seat of which is the blood Gn 9, 4f Lv 17, 11 Dt 12, 23: (249 X) . . . soul = living being, individual, person."
New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 449, 450: "There is no dichotomy [division] of body and soul in the O[ld] T[estament]. The Israelite saw things concretely, in their totality, and thus he considered men as persons and not as composites. The term nepeš [ne′phesh], though translated by our word soul, never means soul as distinct from the body or the individual person. . . . The term [psy‧khe′] is the N[ew] T[estament] word corresponding with nepeš. It can mean the principle of life, life itself, or the living being."
The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1976), Macropædia, Vol. 15, p. 152: "The Hebrew term for 'soul' (nefesh, that which breathes) was used by Moses . . . , signifying an 'animated being' and applicable equally to nonhuman beings. . . . New Testament usage of psychē ('soul') was comparable to nefesh."
The Jewish Encyclopedia (1910), Vol. VI, p. 564: "The belief that the soul continues its existence after the dissolution of the body is a matter of philosophical or theological speculation rather than of simple faith, and is accordingly nowhere expressly taught in Holy Scripture."
New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 452, 454: "The Christian concept of a spiritual soul created by God and infused into the body at conception to make man a living whole is the fruit of a long development in Christian philosophy. Only with Origen [died c. 254 C.E.] in the East and St. Augustine [died 430 C.E.] in the West was the soul established as a spiritual substance and a philosophical concept formed of its nature. . . . His [Augustine's] doctrine . . . owed much (including some shortcomings) to Neoplatonism."
Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de la Bible (Valence, France; 1935), edited by Alexandre Westphal, Vol. 2, p. 557: "The concept of immortality is a product of Greek thinking, whereas the hope of a resurrection belongs to Jewish thought. . . . Following Alexander's conquests Judaism gradually absorbed Greek concepts."
The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria (Boston, 1898), M. Jastrow, Jr., p. 556: "The problem of immortality, we have seen, engaged the serious attention of the Babylonian theologians. . . . Neither the people nor the leaders of religious thought ever faced the possibility of the total annihilation of what once was called into existence. Death was a passage to another kind of life."
Plato's "Phaedo," Secs. 64, 105, as published in Great Books of the Western World (1952), edited by R. M. Hutchins, Vol. 7, pp. 223, 245, 246: "Do we believe that there is such a thing as death? . . . Is it not the separation of soul and body? And to be dead is the completion of this; when the soul exists in herself, and is released from the body and the body is released from the soul, what is this but death? . . . And does the soul admit of death? No. Then the soul is immortal? Yes."
Presbyterian Life, May 1, 1970, p. 35: "Immortality of the soul is a Greek notion formed in ancient mystery cults and elaborated by the philosopher Plato."
Phaedo, 80, D, E; 81, A: Plato, quoting Socrates: "The soul, . . . if it departs pure, dragging with it nothing of the body, . . . goes away into that which is like itself, into the invisible, divine, immortal, and wise, and when it arrives there it is happy, freed from error and folly and fear . . . and all the other human ills, and . . . lives in truth through all after time with the gods."
Also see
Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon, revised by H. Jones, 1968, pp. 2026, 2027;
Donnegan's New Greek and English Lexicon, 1836, p. 1404
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
Hi folks,
As you might have noticed, I am barely available these days due to some challenges in life and I figured that it's probably time to move the ownership of the website to somebody else, that is, to try to sell it or donate it. I still need to do some research on how difficult it's going to be to transfer everything, because frankly I've never done anything like that, but that shouldn't take too much time. Anyway, if anyone is interested, please DM me.
When it comes to the tech stack:
It's almost a fully server rendered site implemented with Elixir/Phoenix. For those familiar with Ruby or Python, it shouldn't be too hard to grasp.
The front-end is mostly jQuery, coz for such a simple interface, it made no sense to bring up heavy artillery like React. Although the chat is implemented with VueJS, due to its highly interactive nature. I can provide more details in DM if interested.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Debate art is financially strapped. Mike is thinking of selling the site or even donating the site because he likely has a life and better things to do than maintain a site that he is losing money on. Even if you have no money there are ways to help. If you are a broke boy than download brave browser. Just go to brave.com and you earn cryptocurrency by donating the crypto currency (BAT) to debateart.com. I will release a video soon on why you should prefer this browser in general but here is a video where in it you can see how easy it is to disable scripts https://youtu.be/rhn0wdYLzls?si=vvG3cqQTGtYcEZVQ . Yes you can disable scripts to get around pay walls. Not all paywalls but some. Don't do that. However it also prevents cross site scripting hacks and also makes clinking links safe if you disable javascript before clicking them. Brave browser is the best browser on the planet so it isn't an act of charity to switch over to it, just donate your BAT which you won't use anyway to debateart.com
If you are not a broke boy. Also please install Brave browser and donate BAT, but also donate on Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/DebateArt
Mike does reward patreon donors with credits, and for more information on where your money goes, click on the following link. https://info.debateart.com/platform-development/donations
Anyway thanks for reading this and lets at least once a year make a real effort to help mike be rewarded for his hard work even if he denies needing the reward or the real risk of not helping him.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The new name of debateart.com is now debatewars.org. Best.Japan has won the name contest and now will be listed as one of the official founders of debate wars. We are going to work on building the site out and improving the redirect. Also I will transfer the name over to mike upon request so long as he changes the branding of the website.
first it is debatewars.org and we will expand it out with debatewars.org/blog and debatewars.org/polls etc. but those domain extensions are not ready yet and of course that will be put on the backburner of Mike wants me to transfer the domain to him. Domain masking is not on and it will be unlikely to get turned on in the near future. Now you guys can feel better about promoting the site without confusing people and making them think the site is about debating art exclusively.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
You are allowed to post on this no matter what, as long as you obey the following rules:
1) You do not debate topics inside this actual thread, instead you create a thread or debate instead that you're welcome to link to here.
2) If you dislike a topic perhaps finding it irritating, comedic or offensive, you either keep it to yourself or discuss it privately with others. No drama here about things.
3) You keep topics suggested within site rules and not veiled attacks against particular members.
4) You state whether your intent is to debate it, which side you prefer to debate and/or whether you want to vote on it. If you would only debate/vote if it's within a certain range of characters or time-away-from now, feel free to specify that.
This is a very obvious solution I am sure many regular debaters and voters have thought 'should' exist but didn't really make happen yet. I am not some 'genius' for this, it is just going to become an official thread where willing and eager voters meet willing and eager debaters so that debaters can engage on topics at times when the voters interested in those topics are available to vote, without needing it to be 'judge debate' format that has to be unrated or any other such complication.
You should stick to topics that count as Rated debates. No 'rap battles between' or such things here. This is designed to help actual quality debating increase here since the main reason it doesn't is that debaters including me get faster 'burnout' as we realise most debates come down to either a lazy vote or someone 'saving' the other debater from the lazy vote etc.
Please do not say you are interested in a topic here, just for the sake of 'sparking ideas'. This is to be actual topics that if you saw them debated, you'd either engage with as a debater or as a voter (or both).
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
There aren't enough active mods to address the frequent violations of rule-breaking. As it currently stands, too many individuals are getting away with abusing the CoC, The New Enforcement hasn't shown to be effective.
Since security is understaffed, we should start bringing some more onto the Task Force. Everyone of these individuals have given permission to be named in this thread, the others have chosen to not be included and remain anonymous.
Here are all of the people that should be promoted to moderator.:
- Savant
- SkepticalOne
- Athias
- greyparrot
Let's bring back security and stability to DART.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
One of our contributors who helped DART through voting and creating debates is now officially leaving the site for good.
His name is Slainte.
Please use this thread to say your goodbyes and express appreciation.
I'll formally announce his resignation from The Tournament within a week in-case he changes his mind.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I didn't want to return but this isn't exactly a 'relapse' of any kind. I am also busier irl these days and unlike Badger and Wylted (oh dear this will be a multiple 'callout' thread maybe? It really isn't) I don't need to 'flex' it. I have always had things going on irl, I set time aside for this website as it was my passion. I did this to be called a leech by some in my absence, with theories on which new account(s) I am, all of which were wrong as I didn't use the website other than as a lurker every 2-3 days.
I do not love DART, I love debating. That said, it doesn't detract from the dismay I feel at the best 1v1 text-based platform that was DDO diminishing to this over time. Badger's new 'tyranny tirade' is just an exaggerated form of everything I apparently stood for that Wylted stood vehemently against in the first election and which (s)he strawmanned me to support. What I actually stood for was stopping direct abuse such as from certain individuals Wylted (PREZ-HILTON) herself (profile says female) has hinted at.
The reason I came back was not the baiting Wylted did, which seems weird to even bait. I didn't try to login to PREZ-HILTON at all and there is outright lying happening about the site security since password resets are fully functional, perhaps it sends to the junk/spam folder of Wylted's Outlook email account (the one she shared with us).
I am unsure what people think I'd say or where I'd stand. It seems everybody presumed I'd be like Wylted and Badger. I told you all from the start, I am pro-freedom, Wylted is not. If you think that was just pretty words, you're wrong. This website has been a shithole just like DDO was. The Weekly Stupid was cyberbullying, it's just most of those he mocked were people who never watched the show so there was no conflict. I don't want to dig shit up or go into how much of a bully that individual was as it is not about him. It is about DDO and the culture. There was a locker-room high school bullying culture that's returning here and has always been here as an undercurrent.
This begins to propel itself and even I give in to the toxicity because it's impossible to be immune to unless you totally disengage from the website. Every change Wylted did to the CoC with the recent MEEP makes it harder to both protect our freedoms as users and for mods to justify actions they make. It leaves everything far murkier. That is linked to the fact the mods themselves are very murky-minded at the moment about everything, just look at the wishy washy waffling Barney and Whiteflame are dishing out about where they stand on this, it's pathetic.
I literally can promise you this; if I were president, this entire series of events would have been handled differently behind the scenes. Oromagi through to Whiteflame and me as President would have a united front as all things would have been negotiated and consensus reached. Oromagi indeed picked one of the most cringe things to propel this, BK clearly shouldn't be banned for that. I warned Whiteflame in private where this was heading. I knew it was a mistake for Oromagi to be posting that thread and that they had to come out ahead of it.
I feel pain and dismay at this website's state. Right now, the problem isn't just the politics or society subforums, it's also Badger and Wylted themselves. Do you think the way they carry themselves is how members should? No. Badger is talking about big muscles and big dick and jokes about Kaitlyn being adopted while Kaitlyn retaliates digging up in allegations and I am not saying she is in the wrong for that, what I am saying is both have been that way for a long time.
Coal and Danielle were pillars of the DDO community, the one Wylted and Badger glorify as does Barney.
This is how they carry themselves in DART:
This is exactly how DDO was. Wish it was still online but I'd have to dig deep to the days such behaviour was commonplace. After all on day 1 of DART the likes of... Actually there's too many to name to that saves me calling anybody out. It was toxic from day 1.
I know exactly what the right moves to make are. If Wylted is seriously leaving and wants me to return, (s)he should give me the presidency, Idc that I only get half a term. I am still eligible for reelection regardless as Wylted doesn't get it's a 2-term limit not 1-term, the restriction is if you served more than 1 before, not more than 1 including the one you run in.
I am happy to be in the moderator chat as a bystander of no official rank whatsoever on a trial run. I am unsure why anybody here trusted Wylted over me but they did. Do what you want, I am tired of begging. I just had to get this off my chest as I agree with the issues of the website and how ugly it looks to others, it's what I've been saying for so many god damn years.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
There are many complaints that DART is a former shell of itself and nothing like DDO. Calls to action have been made to return DART to its glory days by banning the following individuals: YouFound_Lxam, Kaitlyn, Best.Korea, Greyparrot, TWS1405_2, and IWantRooseveltAgain.
The latter two are the most controversial for several reasons. TWS because of his beef with the mods and fights with the community in general, IWantRoosevelt because of his constant baiting of right-wingers/republicans/conservatives and as one of the former president’s nemeses.
Difference between the two is that TWS sometimes comes across as a triggered reactionary for the right, whereas IWantRoosevelt is just a wannabe troll for the left.
Neither of these two rise to the level of being ban-worthy.
Firstly, let go of the delusion that DART should be like DDO. That ship has long sailed.
But that doesn’t mean it’s completely a lost cause, it’s just Damaged Goods with Wasted Potential.
Your first mistake is in assuming that these individuals are responsible for driving away new blood and scaring away potential people. (Which is stupid because of big platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Quora.)
Common denominator is the transparent lack of firm leadership, vision, and purpose.
The actual reality is few people know that DART even exists.
Mike could very easily turn this around if he actively led his community instead of letting his community make the choices. Wylted could have very easily been the man for the job and he’s right that DART is a shithole, but he assumed the title of responsibility for fixing it and he gave up. So that failure is partly his too.
Bootlicker could be what’s needed for the site to change, but I’ve seen no convincing evidence that he is even capable of such, aside from his perpetual ranting and raving. He should return to lurking in the shadows where he’s the most useful.
Instead of confusing the position of President to think he has anything remotely insightful to say.
But I want to touch on something more important about the current state of DART where there is a clear, simple solution.
We have one side demanding Absolute Freedom of Speech and the other demanding Total Censorship.
The solution to this problem is to separate the two by allowing certain categories to have more unregulated discussion and then to enforce more rules in other categories about what kind of subjects/topics are taboo, so people have a place of acceptance.
Instead of allowing such dialogue to cross interfere in one channel. Let the white nationalists/binary people have their channel outlets to freely criticize anything they want, (nobody has to visit their category, engage them or read their posts if they don’t want to.), and then let the leftists/progressives have their channel to have civil discussion so they have a medium for acceptance. There’s no reason both sides cannot co-exist, regardless of the hatred between the two. That is if only, the mutual goal is to move DART forward.
Here are our current leaders who have done a great job for DART.
- whiteflame. Whiteflame has done many great things that people don't really appreciate. He is a consistent voter on debates and has competently enforced the rules without needing to publicly shame or scrutinize people. He is active in Tournaments and has encouraged innovation through fascinating topics. You can't really deny whiteflame is probably one of the least biased people on the site. Whiteflame is what your ideal mod is like. Definitely one of the most interesting and least boring people on the site.
- Barney. Barney was actually the first person that actually got me interested in debating in the first place, and he's regularly provided feedback or criticism. Another thing is Barney was who actually taught me how debates should be structured.
- oromagi. I'm actually a fan of oromagi's brash criticism and strong beliefs. His contributions to the site have mainly been through his insightful commentary and debates. I think the current state of DART would grow even more dull and tedious, if it weren't for people like oromagi challenging people's opinions and holding them accountable. It was oromagi who made me want to be better at debating.
People seem to forget that the mods are unpaid volunteers who participate in the site because they actually care about the community. I think this goes overlooked way too often. If it weren't for either of these three, DART would be fucked.
Other leaders include: Savant, WeaverofFate, and AustinL.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Disclaimer: None of the reasons I present are because of the developer, of course. I do not blame him for any of the instances. They are something I am at fault at and could be more careful with.
Alright, simple, I need auto save the 'moment' I type it. Almost like google documents per say.
I'm not sure how much development that would need let alone the time you have. But I still believe it provides great assistance, at least for me.
My summary of the 'problems' with the current status of it:
- Forget to click "preview argument" and the next thing I know an hour's worth of work, gone.
- Stupid, but I turn off my computer. Accidentally in some cases where it gets powered off because I forgot to charge it and in some cases my computer turns off with my accident misclick.
- Accidentally refresh with either misclick or bookmarks were close, leading to the result of making a close click to my bookmark but instead the refresh button.
As for the refresh part of my reasons, why does the forums have a warning when you have a response for refreshing but not in when writing the debates? If you are not to take my request into consideration, can you take this request at the very most?
Yes, I am aware I can use other things such as google documents however it just makes it more convenient and 'less' time consuming.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I've been on this website for around 28 days and I haven't seen the sight of a female in debates or currently active threads.
All members I've seen are males in both debates and forums.
My question is, why? Why do you think most are male rather than females?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The newest update ignores sacred MEEPs and undermines democracy on DART.
A noob should only need 2 rated debates to vote and 0 unrated debates to debate rated.
5???? They need to complete 5 unrated debages to even begin to debate rated. Even I would just do low valye trash debates to meet that quota
Welcome to the new DART, unpleasant and undemocratic.
I am happy I lost that election, I am probably quitting soon, we have no real engagement between noobs and experienced debaters possible anymore.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Once again, I need opinions. I'm currently not sure who (or if) i'll support.
Sir.Lancelot's postings about his website in development:
Basically I just need opinions to sway my thoughts in the right direction.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
All of us that are high-up climbed there primarily by noobsniping or even if we didn't we climbed in a far more liberal rating era and environment. If this update is to actually stop people climbing by noobsniping, the only way to do that is to completely reset the entire rating system to 1.5k for all (or whatever the new seed for default rating is).
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
We can see the USM is afraid to make a move. Terrified, paralysed and trembling as a Novice and a Madman come for the throne he has rested idle upon for much longer than deserved.
Will the champ make a move or silently wither away? The era of cowards sitting still at the top is soon to be abolished; move or perish, rise or fall that is the way of the competitive debater.
I wonder what would happen if Mike, the admin/owner, introduced Rating decay for every 14 days of debate inactivity muahahaha what would the ex-champs turned timid sideline sitters do?
This is the new era! A new #1 soon, perhaps new #2 above USM.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Beat to Loop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GMKyJhEDI8
One's gotta wonder what pace Supa's doing shit round here,
Campaign on the brain, down a vein seen before like dark striped wood called veneer,
We can only state where we stand so long before we fall,
This election period's growing 7 foot 6 inches far from short but not the cute kinda tall,
People wanna vote, is it happening at all?
Is the history section getting made? What's an untouched spade to a club with music banging wall-to-wall?
Maybe I should stop asking questions never getting answered, hung-up Mike's gone white noise every call,
I'm running to be president on a site that's small and dying; king rat in the gutter with mould blossoming as the wilted fall.
This aint a campaign thread, 'cause the campaign's dead and the plan's lost its heartbeat as the ground of every well-laid plan's stained red,
Where's the passion and the effort? What the hell is going on here, can't a starving site's userbase stay fed?
Too long I put in work for rejection, too long you hoped this would grow, investing time and effort for recessions,
Frankly if it wasn't for the nerds taking it way too serious, this site'd be dead like an oudated expression and that's me being nice instead of saying a metaphor linked to birth or stillborn c-sections,
I wish this could be a lively site that's thriving,
type of site you say 'hey friends in an argument hold it on here, let's dive in',
But it's a slow site that's ebbing away without erosion protection,
Whoever you vote in any given election,
We're on a road of perpetually waiting for a long-lost myth of dot-org perfection.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I am running for DART president. After looking at the state of the website, I saw that there are many issues that need to be dealt with. Although I never previously considered running, I realized that it would be arrogant for me to not consider it. Once I saw the current crop of candidates, I concluded that I must commence my candidacy.
Of course, every candidate must have a platform. My platform has the following planks:
- More fair and balanced vote moderation
- Dispensing with certain well-known pests who should have been banned ages ago
- Clearer rules of what constitutes targeted harassment
- Adding more checks and balances to the power granted to individual moderators
- Adding the office of Vice President (unless that was already added. I can't find the rules for the campaign)
- Adding the office of Site Engagement Coordinator
- Adding the office of Social Media Manager
- Adding the office of Disinformation Corrector
- Placing more limits on the propagation of misinformation, including:
- Warning members who share disinformation
- Placing notices below posts containing disinformation
- Moderation penalties for repeat offenders
- Investigations into the treatment of Vici and Bones
- Investigations into Wylted's corrupt offers of gift cards in exchange for votes
- Investigations into prior vote moderation practices
- Giving new users green coins to encourage involvement
- Introducing an optional verification system and blue check to users who pay $3.14 a month
- Banning people who track my Illuminati travels
- Building a firewall to keep out Canadian users
- Giving everyone one million elo points
I nominate Mharman as Vice President, RM as Site Engagement Coordinator, Wylted as Social Media Manager, and BrotherDThomas as Disinformation Corrector. My ego assures me this is a good idea, and the voices in my head will manage my campaign.
IT'S MY TURN!
(This is a joke. If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
It is time for us to get the site booming. We need to make it appeal fast and risk.
Do you know what people enjoy? Especially women? Good looking websites and i don't just mean good looking guys, women like to go to places good looking women are too and cute reindeer and all of that.
Is this sexist? Guys will join it too but we have a deficit of grown intellectual women who fancy revisiting this over and over again. Let's play the game other website do, we have a nice-looking logo and nice looking design but they take one look at some of the profile pics here and go booooriing.
I WILL MAKE YOU SENSATIONAL, explain your request, I'll give you a profile pic you love.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
The art of debating is not to be openminded to delusions being true and truths being false, the art lies in making your audience fall victim to that and to end up believing your opponent's ideas and opinions are brutally flawed (regardless of your own being true).
My approach has as a foundational idea that debating is far more about destroying and mitigating the opponent's ideas than it is about having good ideas yourself. Once in a while you will lose a debate by following this philosophy of debating but it's not about winning nonstop, it's about playing the game of debating like a bloody canvas on which all blood shed by you had to be shed and all strikes you direct at the enemy demand a lot of time and energy from them to defend against.
I will never be the best debater at just writing a tonne of points/text and coming out a champion from that alone. I am the one to annihilate ten lines of what you wrote with one sentence. It is not easy to debate like this, it just looks easy because it revolves around efficient, minimised effort in actual written debate (the real effort is in the thinking and strategising).
If you step to me in the debating arena, know that I am seasoned, tactical and will rip your ideas to pieces while giving you ideas that are slanted so that you don't quite know how to fight them without putting in a lot of text and effort.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Personal
Hi folks,
There have been a lot of ideas about features for debates and I'd like to have them all in one place. So if you have any ideas or suggestions, please voice them here.
My current ideas:
- We definitely need to have some form of discouragement for forfeits
- We need more strict separation between rated and "normal" debates
- We need a feature to "surrender"
- We need to handle situations when participants get banned
That's just to get started, what else do we have?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I am aware I voted no to the Presidency thing. I understand how this looks but ultimately if it exists I am all for trying. I never once made a secret of my ambitions to be a moderator here, yet I accept that both due to aggression I had to a couple of users here early on and due to me being a social outcast amongst the 'clique' who are moderators, I'll never be one for the foreseeable future.
So, I want you to know what I can and will do for you if you put me in the president position and explain why I am better than almost anyone else who will run for it.
Defense Attorney Guarantee
I absolutely promise you that no matter what Chris, Supa, Ragnar, David or whoever does to gaslight or silence you if/when a ban heads your way and you speak harshly against it, I will both personally represent your case to them even if I disagree with you and think you earned your ban as well as to create a thread myself that they won't dare to close, about your ban for the community to discuss in.
To prove to you that I represented you, I will post captions from our conversations regarding your moderation to a thread I create after the verdict is finally given or they ignore me completely.
Politics/Religion and Bias worries
I identify as left-wing and religiously you could call me agnostic but really I have my own theory that is close to Taoist philosophy in its conclusions and the way I go about life.
I can't promise you that I am going to be completely immune of bias in terms of caring as much if someone who agrees with me is censored vs someone espousing views I disagree with and I think any other candidate who promises you that is not self-aware.
What I can promise you is unless you have been particularly nasty to me personally, I'll unblock you and hear out why your particular censored content is wrongly treated that way.
In cases of harassment and two-way bullying, I have never and will never just instantly say the left-wing person or less religious person is in the right. To me, BrotherDThomas is a much bigger issue to the website community than Ethang5 despite the former blatantly being an atheist troll guised as a Christian and the latter being an unabashed Conservative Christian.
I know what bias is and am aware I have it but I will do everything in my conscious power to correct it. If and when it does happen, I am open to criticism, it will be something I'll need to prove doubters wrong on. I'm not immune to it, I accept it.
My agenda
My primary agenda is to make DART more of a website I'm not ashamed to show off to my family and IRL friends or whatever. As it is now, it's bit of a cringey trollfest in many departments and it's not as much an issue that the trolls are active as it is that I feel not enough special events like debate tournaments and actual worthwhile threads are created and contributed to.
I am going to heavily ensure if someone is baited by trolls to overreact and then gets banned that such user doesn't need to operate here totally afraid and instead ensure that the mods see who the provoking member was and to put into context each post.
I also want to give tips and advise to users in situations that I, as an ordinary user, perhaps never get to hear about or see in a combination of private and public clashes. As you know, I support using the block function much more readily and without the shame that most do. I'd always advise that as a default but I am quite good at seeing situations from both sides and would give tailored advice to any user who is feeling targeted and doesnt know how to handle it without lashing out and who feels the mods don't care.
I want this website to be a pleasure, a website you open every other day excited to see what's being posted rather than worry which nuisance has posted and made you not bother to use the site anymore due to. Those who don't know what I am referring to or how it can be achieved without censorship are welcome to vote against me. Those who want to see if I live by my word, should vote for me and see.
I am not going to cower to Chris, Supa, Ragnar or any of them. I am my own person and my agenda is entirely independent of whatever their clique may approve or or laugh into silence. Whatever you want for the website or to get heard in your defebse, let me know. If you're banned and feel nobody heard your case out, I'm not entirely sure what to do yet as I am not keen to give an email nor would I regularly check one but eventually off-site communication can be arranged. At the moment the presently banned seem to all be severe cases. The only one I think actually could be overturned would be Type1 but that's without knowing when he'd next go wild. When he tries, he's an extremely active and entertaining member. When he doesn't try, he becomes toxic and stupid and I do think personally that he knows that but anyway, the rest I'm not sure about. They all seem legitimate permabans.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I got issues with this quiz too, but because a 'neutral' option exists, it ends up superior to political compass on balance as well as due to the depth of the results.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
Since I am working on restructuring the profile page and the questions section in particular, I thought that maybe it would be a good idea to implement authorless questions, i.e. questions that users receive from the website itself, not from any specific user. These questions could be somewhat general and in my vision, could help people get to know each other. Those questions would not be necessary to answer and would pop up only when there are no other questions received from the real users, so that they wound't spam the inbox.
My idea here is to ask you guys help me compile an initial set of such questions that you think would be interesting to answer or get an answer for.
I think they should be general but not too boring, so something like "What is your position on abortion?" instead of "What do you eat for breakfast?"
So, what do you guys think? Do you like the idea? And if so, would you be willing to help me? :)
My idea here is to ask you guys help me compile an initial set of such questions that you think would be interesting to answer or get an answer for.
I think they should be general but not too boring, so something like "What is your position on abortion?" instead of "What do you eat for breakfast?"
So, what do you guys think? Do you like the idea? And if so, would you be willing to help me? :)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I will start with myself.
Theme Song: P Money - Shook
Closest Fictional Character: Jaime Lannister
Exaggerated Overview:
A complex combination of ruthlessness and sentimentality, RM is known for his willingness to take almost anyone on and doesn't necessarily care too much about what people think of him despite being cocky.
Politically and religiously, RM represents a 'mystical' stance that incorporates pragmatism mixed with mercy and care in a strange concoction that he sees as morally justifable ruthlessness. This also sums up how he approaches debating in the formal arena. RM is less concerned with having the last word in conversation and more concerned with seeming witty enough or arguing well enough before letting things be.
Some find him intelligent, others find him cringey, no one truly knows what to make of him. He may have a soft core beneath a harsh exterior or may have a harder core beneath said softness.
Strengths:
- Extremely energetic and passionate
- Witty and cunning, unpredictable as an opponent
- Somewhat charismatic and quick to welcome newer members (even if it is done in a harsh way)
- Courageous, while some of his fights are easy he is also one of the only experienced members to not flinch too much from the opportunity to challenge a fellow 'Titan' of the site.
Weaknesses:
- Fragile Ego, even though he masks it at times he is sensitive to insults to his ability or self-worth, this can lead him to overreact
- Impulsivity is his fuel, when it goes well it goes brilliant but this also means that if he lacks the 'fire' to debate in the middle of a debate he finds it extremely difficult to keep it going. He debates as a passionate spar, not simply for the win at least not all the time.
- Chaotic nature puts people who prefer structure and monotony at extreme odds with him. There is probably not a single member that enjoys conformity and structure that is allied with RM.
- Bluntness, which he would call honesty, can cause significant abrasion with members and even be interpreted as direct insult at times. He works hard to avoid this but he isn't one to pussyfoot and never will be, at least not by nature.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
At present there are 9 threads of deep conspiracy theory and extreme misinformation/disinformation by Wylted with the tag 'RM' attached.
This is solely done to harass me just as this thread is being done to callout and get a consensus from other users on the matter.
Wylted supported freedom of speech so I am pretty sure he will not oppose me calling him out on this. He may well claim to have done it with benign intent, assuming I'd be interested and that I support his conspiracy theories but that assumption is indeed an unreasonable one and I can tell you that I don't support his threads at all, even when I partially discussed skepticism about mRNA vaccines he uses 'does' when he means 'can' in the thread's title, making a direct accusation rather than an abject hypothesis.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I've been asked a few times to add a new category to the forum - History.
From my side, it's a matter of 10 mins, but I wonder if there's any reason why it shouldn't be done?
From my side, it's a matter of 10 mins, but I wonder if there's any reason why it shouldn't be done?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Just wanted you to know. I have come to accept that debating and this community simehow may be a part of me until I die. Even when I quit, the debater in me remains. I know most of you don't like me but that's not really a factor in me liking this website. I love myself, I don't need you to like me, I just need a place to be myself without too much of a filter and this really is that. It's actually therapeutic and fun if you use this website correctly or any kindnof debating forum really (but there's very few that have as widespread a range of topics and high effort posts as this other than perhaps certain Reddit threads but that lacks the community vibe this has).
I posted this as a joke to a Supadudz April fool's quitting thread hut it has a lot of truth about me and DART (well and the website before it, at least until I really did quit it for good):
If you're worried it's a rickroll or troll vid, ask yourself if I'd do that. That's why I wouldn't do it here, you'd expect it.
Don't like the mods but Ragnar's sometimes funny. MisterChris idk he's sometimes cool, though he's just a voting mod.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
My results are:
- 41.7% Left, 44.4% Liberal
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
This is my result today, feel free to post yours and to keep updated lists, even with combined plots.
For the record, I think the test is poorly designed with many questions eother leaving only one answer correct or alternatively being worded in a confusing way via 'if' and 'sometimes' etc making it confusing what precisely is being asked.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
The one thing 3RU7AL has done more than the rest is he likes every single post on threads he reads (and doesn't like his own).
At first, I was like okay... weird... And it's fine to be weird, we all are weird here in our own way.
The thing I couldn't quite understand is why he never liked his own posts if this was his habit, I figured maybe it's a thing of hoping others notice and like him back (which I have done at times).
That said, I want to note something else, there are users like myself and Supadudz who clearly are posting far more than some beating us at 'likes'. There is no way this is happening if you look at the ratios (we aren't that much worse at making like-worthy posts).
1096:681
This is the ratio of Tarik
2268:1148
This is the ratio of Theweakeredge
12,269:1,049
This is the ratio of Supadudz
9,429:802
This is the ratio of myself.
8,753:1,328
This is the ratio of 3RU7AL.
I am absolutely certain that this would not be possible if it was based on likes received. In fact, I am happy that it is based on likes given as it's kind of cute in a way and that 3RU7AL secretly noticed this. It seems he calculated that it doesn't reward you for liking your own posts, which I now understand is perhaps true (the admin himself said so) but it is measing likes you've given.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I have created a google doc for iconic DART quotes. Submit them in here and I will add them
please link the post as well
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Note: Ragnar has elected me to post the announcement for the Hall of Fame that is upcoming, it is a message approved by him
Greetings DebateArt!
I just wanted to update everyone on the approaching DART Hall of Fame induction process. This process will unfold in two stages, and will take one week to complete.
On or about the 27th of August, one of the mods will post a thread soliciting nominations from the usership in each of the three award categories (users, debates, and threads). Any user will be able to submit up to three nominees in each category for a maximum of 9 nominations per user. Nominators may choose to nominate less than the maximum number if they choose. The nominating window will close on or about the 30th of August. The nominees with the most nominations (approx. 4-6 per category) will advance to the second stage of the process. There are no formal criteria for determining who/what can be nominated; however, if I conclude that a nomination is wholly and blatantly incongruous with the purpose of the HOF (that purpose being to highlight good, notable, and/or consequential inductees), the moderators reserve the right to withhold forwarding that nomination to the second stage of the process.
On or about the 31st of August, the moderators will post a thread soliciting votes from the usership on the finalist nominees in each of the three award categories (users, debates, and threads). Any user will be able to vote for up to three nominees in each category for a maximum of 9 votes per user. Voters may choose to vote less than the maximum number if they choose. The voting window will close on or about the 3rd of September. Those nominees with the most votes (3 per category) will be inducted into the DART Hall of Fame. In the event of a tie preventing exactly 3 inductions per category, the voting window will be extended for just those nominees who/which are tied. Those inducted will be formally honored with entries in the Hall of Fame thread. Those entries will be posted within 2 months of the voting period closing.
There are no prerequisites or eligibility requirements for users to participate in the Hall of Fame nominating or voting processes, except that they have an account on DART and are not voting/nominating from more than one account. Importantly, coordinating votes or severe spamming of votes is prohibited. This will result in all votes that were deemed as spam nullified. You may argue with people on their choice if warranted, but mass campaigning is prohibited. Private PM's with groupchats is prohibited. This process is about awarding those with merit or importance, and not about awarding those who can cajole the most voters. Also, more exact start and end times will be made clear in the threads in question, to ensure there is no ambiguity as to when the processes begin and conclude. Please be sure to check these times
We are also adding one more category to the HoF! This is a Miscellaneous category. This can be for one post, a vote, a comment that is notable for the Hall of Fame. This will not have the same rules apply to it as other categories have, and you are allowed to do as much campaigning for this category as you would like in general without restriction.
I am posting this update now to (a) brief you on the process, (b) give notice about the restrictions placed on campaigning and vote coordinating/rigging, and (c) give you time to consider who/what you would like to nominate, come August 27th. Hopefully this update has been informative. Thank you!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
This website is proof that dictatorship can be benevolent if it's done with respect to the populace.
If you observe what this website runs on, it is not democracy in theory and yet the populace is respected by those in power. DART is a benevolent dictatorship and is proof that it can actually be done and thus that democracy itself is not the highest importance in a political system but instead respect for all is the utmost priority.
This is not proof that Republicanism is superior to Democracy, as this site is also not actually a Republic since each MEEP and discussing in threads that led to the rules and continues to shape them isn't how a Constitution with 'irrevokable rights' is formed or regarded.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
While I am working on the debates listing page, I am wondering if maybe somebody has some ideas or suggestions what you would like to see there?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Hi guys, so I have released a new sign up page that is supposed to look good both on desktops and mobiles, so I'd really appreciate if you could take a look at it from your device and see if everything is okay because I could test it only on so many devices :/ And of course, let me know what you think :) In the meantime, I will quickly replace the other authentication related pages.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Supa's Spectacular Game Show is a game show hosted by me! This game show is unique and does not take much time at all...
HOW TO PLAY
A. I will announce the prompt to the contestants, (eg: Spoiler Alert, the true bad guy in Edgame was ___). Each contestant will submit their answers to me via a private PM.
B. Once all answers are submitted, I will put a list of all the submitted answers on the board. From there, you will pick the best, the 2nd best, and the 3rd best answers. YOU DON'T VOTE YOURSELF
C. Once the votes are tallied, I will announce how each vote is judge
A first place vote is worth $2000 dollars, a second place vote is worth $1000, and a third place vote is worth $500 dollars.
The person with the most money wins an extra $1000 dollars, while second receives $250 extra
The Winner is Whoever Receives the most money by the end of the show
That is the basic premise, but there are other parts to the show as well
-----------------
Double Dollars (Vote)=A vote is worth 2x the dollars
Double Winnings= The Winner Receives 2x the dollars
Jackpot= The Winner Gets the Jackpot Prize
No Vote Bankrupt= People who get no votes lose money
Double Winnings= The Winner Receives 2x the dollars
Jackpot= The Winner Gets the Jackpot Prize
No Vote Bankrupt= People who get no votes lose money
One Word Round=Respond to the prompt in one word
Winner Only= The winner gets $3000 dollars, second gets $0
Mystery Wheel= The winner will get a mystery prize, whether that be money, discord role, promo, or anything. Second gets nothing
-------------------
General Rules
- No discussing about votes to other players
- No allying
- 12hrs to submit an answer, 12hrs to vote the money
- Submit on time
- Unless we go on Discord, no NSFW related cards
We can run this game with as many people as we want, but an 18 person setup would be nice. It takes no time and is very easy. If you have a Discord and want to do more NSFW type cards, please state so
---------------------
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
---------------
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Forum games
Would anyone ever be interested in potentially doing a podcast about DART?
This would be open to anyone too that cares to comment
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
With Covid-19 raging on, we want to do our best to promote social distancing and limiting interaction with people
I'd like to do something like site mafia, or a google hangout/discord call, but I need community input on what you want. I can organize and have the time to do so. Comment if you have ideas for what we can do
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Greetings, everyone!
I have some sad news to share. Speedrace is stepping down from his position as forum moderator. We appreciate the hard work, dedication, and insight that he brought to the team. Needless to say, speedrace is welcome back to the moderation team anytime he feels ready. I wish him the best as he finishes up the semester and starts college.
As of now, the moderation team is:
Chief Moderator: Virtuoso
Deputy Moderator: Ragnar
Voting Moderator: Blamonkey
Voting Moderator: Christopher_best
Thank you,
-Virtuoso
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Hi folks, just wanted to let you know that I've been burnout in the last months so the progress basically stopped but I am gonna try to get back on track with DART. Anyway, my current idea is to start drastically changing the parts of the website to make it more modern and interesting, it's time to leave DDO's shadow and move forward. I will try to make the website more modern*** and accessible for text readers and mobile devices, and what's more important, replace the core functionality with something more advanced and entertaining, which is something I will need your help with :)
I already have some drafts of the new design so you can check it out here:
I already have some drafts of the new design so you can check it out here:
*** To the best of my ability, I am a crappy designer after all :/
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
What threads have been significant to Dart history, which have not been included in the archives? I would like to collect these threads, and put them in one post and petition the site moderation to do the right thing, because the archives appear to be lacking, and I'm sure Dart has a richer history than the archives would have you believe if that was all you were going on.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Greetings, everyone!
The moderation team is looking to add two new moderators to our ranks. We are looking for both a debate moderator and a forum moderator.
The debate moderator will work closely with blamonkey, myself, and Ragnar in handling reported votes, reported debates, and reported debate comments.
The forum moderator will be working closely with speedrace, myself, and Ragnar in handling forum reports, sending warnings, and possibly determine if a user should get a temp-ban.
We will be accepting applications until the end of the week. Please get them in ASAP if you want to be considered.
Edit: To be clear, if you want to apply, please contact me (Virt) directly.
Note: Applications are now closed
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Greetings, everybody!
We are in the process of making revisions to the COC. Most of the text is the same, but there are still some significant differences. The proposed changes can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bcpJ79KM1rOMjgyz5Ssa0T1v0Lj5ybt0LwnD3bXTYNw/edit?usp=sharing
What's New
The text has been reorganized so that the moderation structure is first, then the voting policy, and finally the conduct policy.
The moderation structure text has been changed from "Mod decisions are final and not subject to appeal" to " If you are banned and wish to appeal a ban, you can email the moderation team at [email protected]."
The restraining order section added, " Additionally, a user may request that an RO be placed between them and another member."
Added the following new rules:
B. The Golden Rule
Treat others as they wish to be treated: If someone makes a reasonable request to you, please comply. In other words, don’t be a dick.
C. Authenticity
You may not:
- Impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations in a manner intended to or likely to deceive others. Parody accounts are acceptable as long as they: are clear that they are a parody and not a parody of other Site users;
- Violate other intellectual property rights;
- Plagiarize content and pass it off as your own; and/or
- Impersonate the staff or the moderation team.
D. Violence and Criminal Behavior
You may not:
- Threaten or promote violence against an individual or group of individuals to include terrorism or violent extremism; or
- Engage in or promote criminal activity;
DebateArt is not responsible or liable for any users that may violate national, international, or local laws. It is your responsibility to know the laws that pertain to you and act lawfully at all times.
Added a link to the privacy policy
and finally added a "harassment policy."
J. Harassment
You may not:
- Harass other members;
- Stalk other members;
- Encourage harassment; and
- Post harassing or hateful images in your profile photo.
If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Do not vote on their debates and do not follow them around the site.
Is there anything else we should add or take away?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
It would be interesting to have -as many forums do- a count of the amount of views a topic gets.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I'm assuming so. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Welcome to DebateArt.com!
This thread has organized various useful resources geared particularly for members who are new to the community. To get the most out of your DebateArt.com (DART) experience, please familiarize yourself with this information.
I. Index
- Site Administration . . . . . . Post 1
- Frequently Asked Questions . . . . Post 1
- Site Jargon . . . . . . . . Post 2
- Debate Jargon . . . . . . . Post 2
- Debating . . . . . . . . . Post 3
- Mafia . . . . . . . . . . Post 3
- Voter Resources . . . . . . . Post 4
- Moderation and Site Information . . . Post 4
- Conclusion . . . . . . . . Post 5
II. Site Administration
You might be wondering who to contact if you have questions or concerns. Below I've written the names of the site's administrative team, as well as the names of the moderators for the site's official Discord. They are good points of contact for you in every respect, and if there is something you need, do not hesitate to reach out to them.
DebateArt.com, site owner and administrator
Ragnar, assistant moderator
David, assistant moderator
Speedrace, forum moderator
Deadfire27, discord moderator
III. Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Are there rules for site conduct?
A: Yes. Treating all users with respect is important for a site premised on rational disagreement. For a complete list of voting policies, see the site Rules and Code of Conduct.
Q: How do I report misconduct?
A: If you want to report a post, debate comment, or debate click the flag icon which corresponds to the item you wish to report. If you want to report something else, if the matter is urgent, or if you're uncertain, message a moderator privately and directly with your concerns. Moderation will address the situation as soon as they can.
Q: Are there rules for voting on the site?
A: Yes. Fair voting is important for a site premised on debate. For a complete list of voting policies, see the site Rules and Code of Conduct.
Q: How do I report a bad vote?
A: Click the flag icon in the upper right hand corner of the vote. Moderation will review the report as soon as they can.
Q: What happens when I report something?
A: Moderation examines the report, assess what, if any action should be taken, and takes that action. You are not necessarily told what the outcome of the report was, nor do you have any right to such information.
Q: Can I appeal a moderator's decision?
A: That depends. You can ask a moderator to reconsider their decision, and you can appeal the decisions of the Deputy and Assistant Moderators to the Chief Moderator, but the Chief Moderator's rulings are not subject to appeal.
Q: Can I have multiple accounts?
A: No. You may not have multiple accounts, nor may you have access to more than one account.
Q: How does one become a site moderator?
A: One may become a moderator if appointed to the position by the site owner or the chief moderator.
Q: How do I have my post deleted?
A: You may have your post deleted by contacting a moderator directly to request that your post be deleted.
Q: Can I change my username?
A: No, unless your username itself violates site policy, in which case you will have to change your username to be in accordance with site policy.
Q: What is a MEEP?
A: A MEEP (Moderation Engagement and Enactment Processes) is a process by which the users can vote on proposals submitted to them by moderation. It is a kind of referendum, where users can help guide site policy through democratic consensus and deliberation.
Q: Does DART moderation have power over DART's discord?
A: There is a moderation team on DART's official Discord which is primarily responsible for ensuring that the rules of that site are enforced. While DART's moderation team does not operate on Discord, we do have the authority to punish users here for misconduct they engaged in on DART's official Discord. A user who engages in misconduct on the Discord can therefore be punished by the moderators there and by the moderators here for the same action, depending on its severity.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com