Debate Tournament?

[Xortberg]

So, while thinking on several of the past debates I've taken part in on SF-O, I've come to the realization that I obviously won every single one there has never really been a clear, decided winner. Both sides leave the topic thinking they're right and the other is wrong, and no one is sure who won. As such, I've got a proposition for you, SF-O: a tournament.

The rules will be simple. A standard tournament ladder will apply, with matches being based most likely on prior debating experience, and topics will either be randomly chosen or decided upon by the participants. We will need several judges - I'm thinking three would be best, but we'll see - and even more participants. The debates will follow a rigid structure; the one I am most familiar with is 3 posts each, so each side has an opening, a middle, and a closing. Once all posts are made, the judges will score the participants based on predetermined criteria and the one with the most collective points will be declared the winner, moving on to the next round.

If anyone is interested in participating, either as a judge or as a participant, post here, and once we have a sizable enough pool of people interested, we'll get this party started. If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to make them.

We should also address the possibility of a participant being a judge. I personally see no problem with it, since I'm sure we can work around it, but if anyone has an issue with it be sure to make them known. Otherwise, User has signed up for both roles.

Participants:

Milkyway64

"User"

ballisticwaffles

Xort

falconman97

Nick1349

ajc3000fox

king of the shrooms

Management:

Sissi

DZComposer

Asper Sarnoff

"User"

Sylum

[Milkyway64]

sure y not.

["User"]

I'm down.

[Sarita]

I would love to get involved in making the rules. :D

[Guest Mr. Mario]

I'm out.

[ballisticwaffles]

im most certainly in.

Although the three post thing may be a little too riged for the type of system you may be attempting to create. Might i suggest the normal routine with at least10 minutes in beetween posts for articulate answers to be formed?

[Xortberg]

im most certainly in.

Although the three post thing may be a little too riged for the type of system you may be attempting to create. Might i suggest the normal routine with at least10 minutes in beetween posts for articulate answers to be formed?

We'll hammer out all the specific details once we have this thing more or less underway, but yeah, what I suggested were just some guidelines based on previous debates I've taken part in. They're completely open to revision. Also, I'll now edit the original post to include those who've shown interest.

[DZComposer]

I'll judge if need be.

I love pointing out other people's logical fallacies when I don't actually have to respond to their arguments. :trollface:

[Xortberg]

XD, wonderful. This is moving along nicely.

[Asper Sarnoff]

If the time's favorable, then I should be able to lend a hand as a judge. Nice concept by the way, I like it.

[Samantha Weltzin]

I'd do it if I were a regular here. As it stands, though, I just don't frequent the place enough to set aside the time necessary. Good luck with this, though, as it has my support.

[Thu'um]

I'd join, but i'd turn it into a flame war 

[ballisticwaffles]

not if it was done correctly. And that brings up another topic. What would we be debating? what would the criteria of something need to be in order for it to be considered debate able?

[Thu'um]

not if it was done correctly. And that brings up another topic. What would we be debating? what would the criteria of something need to be in order for it to be considered debate able?

W could vote on it, but depending on the topic i might join.

[Xortberg]

I'd join, but i'd turn it into a flame war 

That's the point of having rules and judges. We'd follow a structured format, and it'd be pretty fun.

W could vote on it, but depending on the topic i might join.

The topics could be anything, really. We could decide to let the judges choose topics, or we could have to participants agree to something. The way the debate team my neck of the woods does it is they give the teams the topic ahead of time so we have time to research it, but we'll see where it takes us. This topic is, for now, just seeing if we could get enough participants, and we'll be hammering out the finer details once we've got it underway.

[Falconman]

i guess ill try this out as a participant...idk...i hardly get the counter point

[Xortberg]

It's pretty simple. Someone makes a point, you try to find evidence to disprove that point, rinse and repeat. You'll get the hang of it.

[Falconman]

oh i get it

[fox1235]

I like to watch this.

Wheres Sabre when you need him, he always talking about logic.

[Xortberg]

I like to watch this.

Wheres Sabre when you need him, he always talking about logic.

Banned.

Anyway, are you interested in joining the tournament here, or just saying you'd like to watch it?

[Fluxy]

I wouldn't mind a good debate, or just simply keeping track of it really. Sign me up for which ever, Xort! =]

[fox1235]

Banned.

Anyway, are you interested in joining the tournament here, or just saying you'd like to watch it?

Watching and oh.

[DZComposer]

So, what's the format going to be? 1v1 bracket (march madness style)? Divide participants into teams and whichever team wins the most debates wins?

[Xortberg]

The way we did it on the forums I used to go to was 1v1 brackets, so that's what I planned on going for. Nothing too fancy.

[Thu'um]

Alright i am joining