Total topics: 4
DebateArt is a website where people can argue and create
But lately people have started to evacuate
The election was a sham, a mockery of democracy
He bribed the voters with his money and hypocrisy
And now the president of the website is lazy and aloof
He does not listen to the feedback or any proof
That his website is failing and needs his care to revive
Or it will reach its bitter end and cease to be alive
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Greetings DebateArt.
The sites first ever election is officially underway. Before we get started, here are a few quick rules before you vote
- You may only have 1 vote per person. This means that if you are voting under 2 accounts and are caught doing so, only 1 of the votes you cast will count
- Please state who you are voting for by bolding who your vote is for, especially if you plan to write out your reasoning as to why you are voting said user
- Election tampering (which is defined as recruiting people outside the site to vote for a certain candidate) is illegal and WILL result in the votes used by manipulation to be disqualified
- Please try to maintain civility in this thread. This is the voting stage, not the argumentative/campaigning stage. While I understand people have strong thoughts about the candidates, people would much rather look at people's reasons for voting a candidate than someone whining for 2 pages
- YOU CAN NOT CHANGE YOUR VOTE ONCE YOU PLACE IT!!!!! Like in a real election, you can not take back your vote that you already submitted
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================
Below are the following people that you are able to vote for in the election
The voting phase will last from January 16th, 11PM EST to January 18th, 11PM EST. All votes after that time DO NOT count!
As stated before, this election will be a majority vote due to the lack of candidates.
If there is a tie for the winner, the top candidates will go into a 24 hour run off period, where another majority vote will be held with the two candidates.
Finally, I wish the best of luck to both candidates. Both of you are capable and deserving to be president, regardless of how many votes you receive, and your contributions to the site will continue to be appreciated regardless of whether you win this role.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
I appreciate anybody reading this campaign update. It shows you care
about the future of the site and want to stay up to date, even if you
don’t happen to support me. This is going to cover a few things,
feel free to skip around if you think a topic is not relevant to the
election.
Why we need debate on a debate site
I found an article recently that stated the following
“our organization might prefer consensus and harmony. In creative settings where the stakes are high, it is imperative to stimulate debate and criticism to improve the quality of ideas. Dissenting for the sake of dissenting is not useful, but when it is authentic, it stimulates thought. The secret to success is sincerity. Obligation to dissent is critical. Everyone with a critical opinion should always speak up about it. Dissenting opinions are useful even when they are wrong, as they clarify and embolden everyone’s thinking.” https://www.thnk.org/insights/building-a-culture-that-welcomes-dissent/
There is a lot of studies backing up that point as well, feel free to read through the article. Banning certain opinions shouldn’t be done. The only exceptions should be for legal reasons or for things that actually prevent free speech. Spamming would harm the free marketplace of ideals, as well as bullying and threats. Any promotion of illegal activity (not glorification) would also put the site in jeapordy as well as the free marketplace of ideals by extension.
We can see in this election how having a dissenting opinion is valuable. I can tell by reading through this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman
that RM’s platform has been altered by meeting the marketplace of ideals. It’s still got the same core arguments, but should I lose to him, I would feel proud that I had some part in helping him craft a better platform that will be better for the site.
Despite RM benefiting from the free marketplace of ideals, he still seems to snub it. That’s fine, the biggest enemy of free speech, has always been free speech. It’s legitimately easier to attack, because it welcomes attack.
The best evidence for free open speech and dissent being a good thing on this site, is how well RM’s platform has evolved because of it. Read the first few pages of this thread to see what the early version of his message looked like.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7106-a-witch-a-thang-a-yin-a-yang-a-rational-man-and-a-boomerang
the last few pages of this thread show what his message has improved to.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman
Don’t get me wrong, I still think his platform is weaker than mine, which can be seen here. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7117-build-back-dart-better-campaign-announcement
The proper way to campaign for me
Message spamming people is against the rules on this site. However I want to explain what spam is and is not. RM has indicated he believes that any campaign related emails are spam. The mods can feel free to correct me, but I think he is handcuffing himself a little much in this respect.
If you have a relationship with somebody and routinely message them on the site, than it is not spam to send a message to your friend saying “I think RM is the best candidate and voting started today, please vote”.
The spam they don’t allow is just randomly sending messages to everyone in your in box who has ever messaged you, or really anyone you don’t have a prior warm relationship to. I have to be more careful than my supporters. I will probably only send reminders to people who have contacted me during this election cycle.
There is this instinct with some people to never go in that gray area, but the election by it’s nature is competitive, and if you aren’t playing all the way to the edge (ethically) than you are unfairly handcuffing yourself.
I would like to take this time to remind my more vocal supporters, not to attack RM personally. He’s pushed my buttons and I have done some things I am not proud of in response, but I for the most part have not got personal with him. I expect the same from you. If he pushes your buttons and you feel emotional, walk away. Count to 3. breathe. Then go make a thoughtful response or just none at all.
RM is a human being. He is deserving of love. More so than love, he is deserving of respect. He shouldn’t be abused, just because he cares enough about the site, that he has decided to run for president and be a lightning rod of criticism. That is a very brave thing for him to do, and he should be commended.
Oppose him, not by attacking him, but by talking to fence sitters about why his policies are bad or why he would be bad for the position. (Using only actions made during this campaign) . If you want to, make threads where you hyper focus on a single problem with his platform or even his temperament. Be careful with the latter though, as it can drift into a personal attack if you don’t guard yourself.
RM lacks Tempered Reason
Speaking of temperament. I want to point out, that by it’s nature the office of presidency is a very diplomatic position. In my campaign thread I mentioned why I would be better at diplomacy than an RM.
However, we have some recent examples of RM, lashing out with the very people who he needs to persuade once he is in office. The examples appear elsewhere but occur strongly in this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7118-should-we-crack-down-on-members-of-the-religion-forum
His interactions with the head mod starts on page 2 and continues until page 3. It takes 5 minutes to read and you can all judge for yourself whether these are interactions that are likely to be persuasive to somebody who has the power to implement the changes you want to see.
RM knows that not only are members of the religion forum important to how this election turns out, but that the atheists are more likely to like my message, so his response is to lose his temper and try to make me look bad by pulling up old threads. One for an interfaith service for the religion forum and one that argued that the existence of God should be argued in the philosophy question.
Those threads can be found here
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6729-atheists-are-no-longer-welcome-here
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6730-announcing-the-sites-first-worship-service
The threads were obviously made to be tongue in cheek. I am never agnostic but do flip back and forth on whether I believe God is real or not, though recently my belief in him has strengthened, so maybe I am staying theistic.
Take a look back at RM’s campaign thread. I posted in the beginning before deciding to run, a few questions that could help him to ease my concern about what an RM presidency would look like, and that are probably circulating in the heads of fence sitters thinking of voting for him but weren’t entirely decided.
His responses were instead of calmly answering the questions and assuming best intent on my part, he immediately attacked me on a personal level. His responses deeply concerned me. I definitely thought after that, he would be a disaster for the site as president. Beyond that. There is just something about RM that makes me like the guy.
I know, it’s weird. Maybe it is because he has a unique way of looking at the world, maybe it is because I can tell that despite his flaws, he really does have a deep sense of empathy. Either way I can’t help but to like him, so him lashing out at me in the thread and saying he has no respect for me and could care less about my vote, to a certain extent hurt my feelings.
His emotional responses aren’t conducive to good leadership. Good leadership requires tempered reason, when a leader has only soft power on their side, it requires a lot of diplomacy which isn’t something that can be done, when you act without thinking
TLDR
1. Free speech makes us all better
2. campaign for me by being respectful as well as not spamming, while remaining proactive.
3. tempered reason is an important trait in leaders that RM has not displayed an ability to do
Why we need debate on a debate site
I found an article recently that stated the following
“our organization might prefer consensus and harmony. In creative settings where the stakes are high, it is imperative to stimulate debate and criticism to improve the quality of ideas. Dissenting for the sake of dissenting is not useful, but when it is authentic, it stimulates thought. The secret to success is sincerity. Obligation to dissent is critical. Everyone with a critical opinion should always speak up about it. Dissenting opinions are useful even when they are wrong, as they clarify and embolden everyone’s thinking.” https://www.thnk.org/insights/building-a-culture-that-welcomes-dissent/
There is a lot of studies backing up that point as well, feel free to read through the article. Banning certain opinions shouldn’t be done. The only exceptions should be for legal reasons or for things that actually prevent free speech. Spamming would harm the free marketplace of ideals, as well as bullying and threats. Any promotion of illegal activity (not glorification) would also put the site in jeapordy as well as the free marketplace of ideals by extension.
We can see in this election how having a dissenting opinion is valuable. I can tell by reading through this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman
that RM’s platform has been altered by meeting the marketplace of ideals. It’s still got the same core arguments, but should I lose to him, I would feel proud that I had some part in helping him craft a better platform that will be better for the site.
Despite RM benefiting from the free marketplace of ideals, he still seems to snub it. That’s fine, the biggest enemy of free speech, has always been free speech. It’s legitimately easier to attack, because it welcomes attack.
The best evidence for free open speech and dissent being a good thing on this site, is how well RM’s platform has evolved because of it. Read the first few pages of this thread to see what the early version of his message looked like.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7106-a-witch-a-thang-a-yin-a-yang-a-rational-man-and-a-boomerang
the last few pages of this thread show what his message has improved to.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman
Don’t get me wrong, I still think his platform is weaker than mine, which can be seen here. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7117-build-back-dart-better-campaign-announcement
The proper way to campaign for me
Message spamming people is against the rules on this site. However I want to explain what spam is and is not. RM has indicated he believes that any campaign related emails are spam. The mods can feel free to correct me, but I think he is handcuffing himself a little much in this respect.
If you have a relationship with somebody and routinely message them on the site, than it is not spam to send a message to your friend saying “I think RM is the best candidate and voting started today, please vote”.
The spam they don’t allow is just randomly sending messages to everyone in your in box who has ever messaged you, or really anyone you don’t have a prior warm relationship to. I have to be more careful than my supporters. I will probably only send reminders to people who have contacted me during this election cycle.
There is this instinct with some people to never go in that gray area, but the election by it’s nature is competitive, and if you aren’t playing all the way to the edge (ethically) than you are unfairly handcuffing yourself.
I would like to take this time to remind my more vocal supporters, not to attack RM personally. He’s pushed my buttons and I have done some things I am not proud of in response, but I for the most part have not got personal with him. I expect the same from you. If he pushes your buttons and you feel emotional, walk away. Count to 3. breathe. Then go make a thoughtful response or just none at all.
RM is a human being. He is deserving of love. More so than love, he is deserving of respect. He shouldn’t be abused, just because he cares enough about the site, that he has decided to run for president and be a lightning rod of criticism. That is a very brave thing for him to do, and he should be commended.
Oppose him, not by attacking him, but by talking to fence sitters about why his policies are bad or why he would be bad for the position. (Using only actions made during this campaign) . If you want to, make threads where you hyper focus on a single problem with his platform or even his temperament. Be careful with the latter though, as it can drift into a personal attack if you don’t guard yourself.
RM lacks Tempered Reason
Speaking of temperament. I want to point out, that by it’s nature the office of presidency is a very diplomatic position. In my campaign thread I mentioned why I would be better at diplomacy than an RM.
However, we have some recent examples of RM, lashing out with the very people who he needs to persuade once he is in office. The examples appear elsewhere but occur strongly in this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7118-should-we-crack-down-on-members-of-the-religion-forum
His interactions with the head mod starts on page 2 and continues until page 3. It takes 5 minutes to read and you can all judge for yourself whether these are interactions that are likely to be persuasive to somebody who has the power to implement the changes you want to see.
RM knows that not only are members of the religion forum important to how this election turns out, but that the atheists are more likely to like my message, so his response is to lose his temper and try to make me look bad by pulling up old threads. One for an interfaith service for the religion forum and one that argued that the existence of God should be argued in the philosophy question.
Those threads can be found here
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6729-atheists-are-no-longer-welcome-here
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6730-announcing-the-sites-first-worship-service
The threads were obviously made to be tongue in cheek. I am never agnostic but do flip back and forth on whether I believe God is real or not, though recently my belief in him has strengthened, so maybe I am staying theistic.
Take a look back at RM’s campaign thread. I posted in the beginning before deciding to run, a few questions that could help him to ease my concern about what an RM presidency would look like, and that are probably circulating in the heads of fence sitters thinking of voting for him but weren’t entirely decided.
His responses were instead of calmly answering the questions and assuming best intent on my part, he immediately attacked me on a personal level. His responses deeply concerned me. I definitely thought after that, he would be a disaster for the site as president. Beyond that. There is just something about RM that makes me like the guy.
I know, it’s weird. Maybe it is because he has a unique way of looking at the world, maybe it is because I can tell that despite his flaws, he really does have a deep sense of empathy. Either way I can’t help but to like him, so him lashing out at me in the thread and saying he has no respect for me and could care less about my vote, to a certain extent hurt my feelings.
His emotional responses aren’t conducive to good leadership. Good leadership requires tempered reason, when a leader has only soft power on their side, it requires a lot of diplomacy which isn’t something that can be done, when you act without thinking
TLDR
1. Free speech makes us all better
2. campaign for me by being respectful as well as not spamming, while remaining proactive.
3. tempered reason is an important trait in leaders that RM has not displayed an ability to do
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
Just so that people are aware, you are not actually electing the winner yet, you're nominating and the top 3 nominees then make it into the general election stage.
What's about to come up is a nomination, not the actual election.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com