The Great Debate

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:11 am

What would you all think of having a real debate?

One with teams, rules, word count, topic, judges and strippers.

First we need to know if anyone is actually interested in it. At minimum it would be 3v3 or 4v4.

Teams:

Once everyone is in we can select teams. This could be done randomly through a random number generator done by one of the judges. Or we could have two Captains and they pick their teams like in gym class, one goes then the other.

The random way is more fair. If we have 7 or 9 people who want to get in one is going to be left out for this one.

If we do it the teams way people will probably get on the teams they want but the one left out might get upset.

Topic:

This one is easier. We all put forward topics we think could be good to debate. Then everyone chooses their top five favorite and the judges can then pick one that they think is fair. Can use these results for future debates if we have one. Or when we get a list we can number them and then do the random number generator again.

Judges: Probably Graham or Ian if they want and have time and maybe a member who isn't in the debate.

Thoughts, intrest?

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:13 am

Sure, I'm in. I'm sure you're all shocked to hear.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:15 am

Shocked...

Whats your thoughts on how we should do teams?

Topics?

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:56 am

As for teams:
Well, we can pick a 'captain' randomly, I suppose, and then he/she/shi can pick whomever they want from the others.

As for topics:
No idea. It'd be best to have something that clealry has a right and wrong answer, with a fair bit of observed evidence, and which hasn't really been discussed that much before.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:16 am

I think once we have a topic we can then decide on the captains. Since up until then we dont know who will be on what team.

Topic. Well we have pretty much debated most thing I can think of but we could rehash a few of the good ones.

Things like sauser seperation

Civlians on starships

MVAM

Was the Federation right to sign a treaty with the Romulans that say they arent allowed cloaking tech

should the prime directive be followed in situations such as "homeworld"

Are Data and the Doctor sentient and should they have equal rights

Should the Federation accept Cardassia into it after the Dominion war.

Section 31: Necessary evil? or just evil? (I like that one)

Should the Federation consider the Marqui "terrorists"

Should the Allies anex Breen space after the war?

Should the Federation continue to explore the Gamma quadrant noe the war is over or leave well enough alone.

Should GE'ed humans like Doctor Bashir be discriminated against? Should GE humans be illigal like it is?

Anyone else got some? What ones do you like?

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:18 am

Good choices.

sauser seperation

Civlians on starships

MVAM

Section 31: Necessary evil? or just evil?

Should the Federation consider the Marqui "terrorists"

Should the Allies anex Breen space after the war?

Those ones could be rather interesting to discuss, I think.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:41 am

No extra suggestions, but I'm up for the idea in principle.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:45 am

I was hoping you'd be in. Something tells me you'll either be captain of a team or first choice

KuvahMagh · Post by **KuvahMagh** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:16 pm

I'd go in for this. You would have to have it in an area where only those involved could post though, otherwise you could end up with other people coming into it.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:19 pm

We'd have this thread for discussion about it and one where only the debate happens. Anyone not in it wont post there.

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:22 pm

We'd also need to establish the rules of the debate, and have them carefully moderated by third parties to ensure that these rules are not breached.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:27 pm

Yeah I;m trying to find a old site I used to go to that had something like this.

The Judges will monitor it to make sure the rules wont be breached.

I imagin they would be something like.

Maximum word count 1000 words incuding outside quotes such as scripts and data points.

Debate Order ie Team 1 Member A then Team 2 Member A. Each individual team will decide on the order they go in.

The replying post has to be made with in 24 hours maximum.

Anything else?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:32 pm

Another point: on-topicness would have to be strictly enforced. TR-116 syndrome is one thing in general debates, but in something formal like this the tendency would have to be clamped down on.

Post by **Teaos** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:35 pm

Thats not a rule. If a team is stupid enough to go off topic they loose.

Since this is more formal and you have a team strategy I doubt anyone will go off topic. Everyone only gets one post.

KuvahMagh · Post by **KuvahMagh** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:37 pm

Acceptable Sources need to be clearly defined, will we restrict to just the TV/Movies, or open it up to the Manuals, interviews, Magazines and other sources. The main reason I mention this is because while not Cannon these do give insight into the thoughts of the people who worked on the projects.

Personally I would restrict to just the Pure Cannon but I just want to know what everyone else thinks about it, there is a lot of important info in these guides and if the boundaries aren't laid out ahead of time then you will end up debating the validity of the source if it came from an interview and such rather than the info itself.