Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]
Formal debate proposals * 2
    #25975061 -

It doesn't look like XUL will debate me, but I kinda still really want to participate in one, so do we have any other resident conservatives, right-wingers, or other* who want to take me up on the offer? Doesn't have to be on the same topic as the one I proposed to XUL.

I enjoyed following along with Falcon91Wolvrn03 and Enlil in their debate, and am interested in trying my own hand at a more formal debate. So any takers?

I'll even extend this to our left-wingers, because I know we don't agree on everything. Let's get some debates going


Here would be the format:

Opening argument in favour.

Opening argument against.

First rebuttal; an opportunity to introduce more evidence and directly respond to against argument.

Seconded rebuttal; an opportunity to introduce more evidence and directly respond to the argument in favour.

[1-3 rounds of rebuttals; specific number confirmed before beginning]

Instead of final rebuttal, a closing statement without introducing any new evidence.

Finally, a mutually agreed upon judge (or a panel of three judges) decides which position was more convincing, and why.

At this point the closed thread will be open for commenting from anyone.


--------------------

Edited by shivas.wisdom (05/06/19 06:39 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25975066 -

I accept your debate via PM.

:pm:

When you scream Nazi at people, like you just did yesterday, I won't be restricted by forum rules.

lowbrow said:
shivas.wisdom said:
Just making sure to passive aggressively call you a nazi in front of everybody for wrongthink. Carry on.


FTFY.




--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (05/06/19 06:30 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: XUL]
    #25975071 -

Notice how you said, "in front of everybody."

Is this why you won't debate in private?

Because you need the crowd?


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (05/06/19 06:32 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: XUL] * 2
    #25975077 -

XUL said:
I accept your debate via PM.

:pm:

When you scream Nazi at people, like you just did yesterday, I won't be restricted by forum rules.

lowbrow said:
shivas.wisdom said:
Just making sure to passive aggressively call you a nazi in front of everybody for wrongthink. Carry on.


FTFY.




Don't do it via PM everyone needs to see the arguments laid out.


--------------------
https://youtu.be/cTsEzmFamZ8

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25975079 -

XUL, that's not an actual quote of mine. It was clearly edited by lowbrow.


I'll ask you to try and stay on topic in this thread please. It is intended for formal debate proposals.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25975086 -

That's because offending texts are deleted after the whistle blows.

You know this.

Further, this is in topic. My name is in the thread talking about me debating you.

I have explained why I would prefer a private debate -- or a debate without forum rules. Because you habitually call people Nazis while you debate.

I want freedom of speech.


--------------------
TRUMP 2020

Edited by XUL (05/06/19 06:43 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: XUL]
    #25975095 -

Wants formal debate, can't carry a conversation with out berating another human for their beliefs. :l

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: XUL] * 1
    #25975102 -

No post was deleted. A deleted post will still remain, even if the actual content is removed. This is the post lowbrow is responding to, and was the source of his edit.

Can you provide examples of me habitually calling people nazis? I don't think I have ever done that without corroborating evidence, but I'm willing to enter into a formal debate on the matter.

And, as I have said already, I am willing to suspend the forum rule prohibiting personal attacks during any public debate we have (assuming Enlil agrees to it). Is that your only reason for preferring a private, rather than public, debate?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25975115 -

Zionist Occupied Government. Say it loud, say it proud.


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott]
    #25975118 -

Would you like to have a formal debate on that topic?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom]
    #25975127 -

I doubt we would even get past the initial stage of agreeing on definitions.


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott]
    #25975140 -

Let's find out. What terms specifically, and how would you define them?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25975145 -

Yesterday you cited the ADL for one of your definitions. That's how I know you're not a serious person.


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott] * 1
    #25975154 -

Assuming you can provide a reasonable standard, there's a good chance I'll accept your own definitions for the purpose of the debate. Or how about using Wikipedia for our standard definitions?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 1
    #25975167 -

The only way forward is you either get redpilled to zionist power and jewish supremacy or we go our separate ways. I don't see the former happening any time soon. Later gator.


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott] * 1
    #25975170 -

Great Scott said:
The only way forward is you either get redpilled to zionist power and jewish supremacy or we go our separate ways. I don't see the former happening any time soon. Later gator.


LOL :facepalm:


--------------------
https://youtu.be/cTsEzmFamZ8

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott] * 4
    #25975177 -

So, afraid to debate your ideas? I guess you don't think your redpill is actually strong enough to survive that disinfecting sunlight eh?


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: YangSupporter]
    #25975183 -

There's countless examples. Reading some of Ariel Sharon's own words would be a good enough place to start. And if you're still up to it, there's some juicy passages in the Talmud that leave little room for doubt. Enjoy, cattle goy.


--------------------
:thumbup: :thumbdown:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: Great Scott] * 5
    #25975187 -

Yet, despite the apparently countless examples leaving little room for doubt, you are still unwilling to publicly debate me on the matter; curious.  :strokebeard:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Formal debate proposals [Re: shivas.wisdom] * 4
    #25975213 -

The fact Great Scott is unwilling to publicly debate his position formally shows the weakness of the white nationalist arguments.


--------------------
https://youtu.be/cTsEzmFamZ8

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Libertarians & Greens to Debate in Miami
( 1 2 3 all )		 Ancalagon 4,951 49 10/03/04 10:12 PM
by Gijith
* Rasmussen Reports - Badnarik In Debates Ancalagon 1,410 17 07/27/04 04:24 PM
by Ancalagon
* Sick of partisan bickering Silversoul 599 6 09/30/06 12:37 PM
by Gijith
* The Debate was Theatre. methikist 972 9 10/01/04 11:10 AM
by Viaggio
* Kerry cheats at first debate?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 Phred 7,087 148 10/05/04 12:53 PM
by Vvellum
* Why don't the third party candidate's have their own debate? Signo 727 9 10/26/04 10:15 PM
by BleaK
* 'Debating' the Iraq War
( 1 2 all )		 Ancalagon 4,357 23 06/20/06 10:51 AM
by zappaisgod
* Russia/China form strategic alliance to counter Western influence SWEDEN 780 2 02/07/05 05:16 PM
by downforpot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,031 topic views. 5 members, 113 guests and 42 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.035 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.