President Shrub
27-07-2005, 18:36
This poll and discussion is for the Progressive NS Think-Tank, composed of:
President Shrub
Vetalia
The Nazz
Icelaca
Dysis
Kroisistan
The NAS Rebels
I believe we have enough members, so, unless anyone disagrees, I think sign-ups should be closed. I wouldn't want the "one sentence," posters to invade because they think it's 'cool.' If anyone believes someone new should join, feel free to sponsor them, and we'll briefly discuss and vote on it democratically.
Anyway, we need to decide which issue to debate first and also, how often, I'm thinking it'll work something like this:
Once a week, we debate one issue and decide an issue for next week. When deciding an issue, we'll outline what information needs to be found in order to prove any policy, one way or the other, as well as the burden of proof.
For example, with gun control, the information I see that you'd need are:
-The cause of gun-related deaths (Is gun control the only factor which affects murder rates, or even the main factor?)
-How many criminals use registered guns
-How easy it is to get a gun, illegally, with or without gun control
-Comparative murder rates of countries with different laws
And finally, you need to determine the "burden of proof," in case there's equal evidence for either argument or little evidence at all. In the case of gun control, in my opinion, the burden of proof lies upon gun control proponents.
Because you have two possibilities:
-Gun control doesn't work, and supporting it pointlessly restricts liberty
-Gun control works, and opposing it causes death.
At first, the previous seems more significant, making gun control opponents the ones who have the burden of proof. However, both Liberalism and Libertarianism are founded on the principle that you do not restrict liberty without ample evidence. So, by the gun control activists' own ideology, they are the ones who have the burden of proof. Furthermore, if, theoretically, any government becomes corrupt, if the citizenry is not armed, the "social contract," would be social extortion. Thus, if there's no evidence or equal evidence, our conclusion should be to oppose gun control.
Anyway, so to clarify:
DAY 1: Discuss an issue, outline the issue we're going to debate next.
DAY 2-5: Discuss the current issue, research the next issue.
DAY 6: I'll write a report on the issue from the members' overall concensus, including all information that was presented.
DAY 7: Discuss the next issue and outline the issue we'll debate after that.
Of course, this might need to be extended, in case of a rather long debate. After the end of that 7 days (and right before we discuss a new issue), I'll write a report on the group's overall concensus, including all the information put forth.
So, first... Just let me know which issue you'd like to discuss and if you believe there'd need to be any changes to the schedule above. Oh, it'd probably also be a good idea to exchange email addresses, I guess. I'm also considering whether to move this debate to a less busy forum (or turning it into a newsgroup), so we don't need to post-whore to make sure members see the thread.
President Shrub
Vetalia
The Nazz
Icelaca
Dysis
Kroisistan
The NAS Rebels
I believe we have enough members, so, unless anyone disagrees, I think sign-ups should be closed. I wouldn't want the "one sentence," posters to invade because they think it's 'cool.' If anyone believes someone new should join, feel free to sponsor them, and we'll briefly discuss and vote on it democratically.
Anyway, we need to decide which issue to debate first and also, how often, I'm thinking it'll work something like this:
Once a week, we debate one issue and decide an issue for next week. When deciding an issue, we'll outline what information needs to be found in order to prove any policy, one way or the other, as well as the burden of proof.
For example, with gun control, the information I see that you'd need are:
-The cause of gun-related deaths (Is gun control the only factor which affects murder rates, or even the main factor?)
-How many criminals use registered guns
-How easy it is to get a gun, illegally, with or without gun control
-Comparative murder rates of countries with different laws
And finally, you need to determine the "burden of proof," in case there's equal evidence for either argument or little evidence at all. In the case of gun control, in my opinion, the burden of proof lies upon gun control proponents.
Because you have two possibilities:
-Gun control doesn't work, and supporting it pointlessly restricts liberty
-Gun control works, and opposing it causes death.
At first, the previous seems more significant, making gun control opponents the ones who have the burden of proof. However, both Liberalism and Libertarianism are founded on the principle that you do not restrict liberty without ample evidence. So, by the gun control activists' own ideology, they are the ones who have the burden of proof. Furthermore, if, theoretically, any government becomes corrupt, if the citizenry is not armed, the "social contract," would be social extortion. Thus, if there's no evidence or equal evidence, our conclusion should be to oppose gun control.
Anyway, so to clarify:
DAY 1: Discuss an issue, outline the issue we're going to debate next.
DAY 2-5: Discuss the current issue, research the next issue.
DAY 6: I'll write a report on the issue from the members' overall concensus, including all information that was presented.
DAY 7: Discuss the next issue and outline the issue we'll debate after that.
Of course, this might need to be extended, in case of a rather long debate. After the end of that 7 days (and right before we discuss a new issue), I'll write a report on the group's overall concensus, including all the information put forth.
So, first... Just let me know which issue you'd like to discuss and if you believe there'd need to be any changes to the schedule above. Oh, it'd probably also be a good idea to exchange email addresses, I guess. I'm also considering whether to move this debate to a less busy forum (or turning it into a newsgroup), so we don't need to post-whore to make sure members see the thread.