NationStates Jolt Archive

In NS General, it is considered 'stupid' to declare yourself right and the other wrong, and thus the basis for winning an argument.

However, it seems just fine if you're using the telegram system.

I had received numerous telegrams from Kubiilikhan, a VERY small nation, and a recent addition to the forums, who hopefully hasn't posted because if he did, the majority of you lovely NS'ers would eat this kid alive.

I don't have the previous TGs, but, to sum this up, I posted an... "odd", if you will thread some time ago. This young'un decided to message me because of what I posted.

I defended myself with my own personal brand of "Liberal" logic (though, I'd probably call it "Kryozerkia Logic"). The young'un then went on to in two separate telegrams write in all caps.

I used it to tell him it wouldn't help to validate his position.

He told me that I couldn't say that and thus, I had no argument.

I then wrote back last night a lengthy response about what a belief is and how if you believe in something, if you truly believe, it can't be dented by the opinion of another person.

And thus, I present...

Alright that's it!!! I give up on you you'll never understand and accept what is right and good, and frankly I don't know what you are talking about!! I'm actually 12 yrs old and I beat you in this argument, and you just won't admit it. Basically you're telling me you just made up whatever you want to believe and that's just like saying, "Well...today I'm going go kill whoever I want and steal whatever I want." So go right ahead and do that if you believe is no God.

>:( Goodbye.

What I'm about to say is for your own benefit. You're obviously somewhat naive, so, I'll spare you what I really think.

If you were to post your views and opinions on NS General, and in your defense state your age, they won't care because they see you as 'one-minded'. The majority of people would eat you alive and laugh at you. They have little tolerance for people who can't argue without resorting to using all caps and declaring that they've won simply because they seem to think that they have.

However, you will likely ignore my advice... thus, I dare you to take that to the general forums. I want you to tell them your opinion, wait for someone to post a counter-opinion, and then tell them how you've won without actually winning.

Why am I posting this? Because my message got bounced back.

I guess it means that Kubiilikhan gives up... (not that I'm saying I won).

Whoever stops bleeding first loses. :)

Technically you have won when the other person have been persuaded to come to your side, or you have come to a compromise (a win-win, lose-lose-situation).

Here on NSG that (almost) never happens, so here the winner is the one who wins the Game.

Which you lost.

Back in the good old days it was whoever didn't have the rapier stuck through his gut.

Technically you have won when the other person have been persuaded to come to your side, or you have come to a compromise (a win-win, lose-lose-situation).

Here on NSG that (almost) never happens, so here the winner is the one who wins the Game.

Which you lost.
Now, what do you mean by "game"? This "Game" you talk of intrigues me me greatly, because, what is a "game"? We could consider life to be a "game"...

Now, what do you mean by "game"? This "Game" you talk of intrigues me me greatly, because, what is a "game"? We could consider life to be a "game"...

Damn, now I lost it *mumbles*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_%28game%29

Damn, now I lost it *mumbles*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_%28game%29
So... we can neither win nor lose, but, swing in both directions depending on the circumstances.

Damn, now I lost it *mumbles*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_%28game%29

I direct your attention to my sig. Thank you, and goodnight.



*wins*
That's how you win

Everybody wins! YAYYYY!

Everybody wins! YAYYYY!
I like your optimism; have a cookie.

some days i wish there were "debate moderators" who would have the power to close a debate thread and declare a winner. too many fairly serious debates go on and on and dissolve into "you said this, no i didnt" posts.

to give an example, some abortion threads would be won by the pro side, some by the con side depending on the quality of the posts submitted. if the one side can't be bothered to post quality posts, the other side would win no matter if most people tend to think that that side is wrong.

certain frequent posters would always lose because they change the subject as soon as they are shown to be incorrect or hijack a thread to an entirely different topic if they can.

some days i wish there were "debate moderators" who would have the power to close a debate thread and declare a winner. too many fairly serious debates go on and on and dissolve into "you said this, no i didnt" posts.

to give an example, some abortion threads would be won by the pro side, some by the con side depending on the quality of the posts submitted. if the one side can't be bothered to post quality posts, the other side would win no matter if most people tend to think that that side is wrong.

certain frequent posters would always lose because they change the subject as soon as they are shown to be incorrect or hijack a thread to an entirely different topic if they can.

The problem is, who can be considered neutral enough for that kind of proposal?

Why do people allways talk in terms of 'winning' and 'losing' and arguement, you don't 'lose' a discussion, you win insight or you convince the other of your point of view.
Is everyone really that competitive?

The problem is, who can be considered neutral enough for that kind of proposal?

Lunatic Goofballs? :cool:

The problem is, who can be considered neutral enough for that kind of proposal?

it might be difficult but i bet there are people willing and qualified to do it. if they are forced to "show their work" in why which side won, it would go a long way to quieting the losing side.

it wouldnt be done with EVERY thread but it would be great to have a final post of

PRO-side wins

Con- side loses

best pro posters are A, B, and C worst pro posters are X, Y, and Z.

same for con

and

most useless posters are M, N, and O.

a bit of recognition that some people are dynamite debaters and some are just idiots.

it might be difficult but i bet there are people willing and qualified to do it. if they are forced to "show their work" in why which side won, it would go a long way to quieting the losing side.

it wouldnt be done with EVERY thread but it would be great to have a final post of

PRO-side wins

Con- side loses

best pro posters are A, B, and C worst pro posters are X, Y, and Z.

same for con

and

most useless posters are M, N, and O.

a bit of recognition that some people are dynamite debaters and some are just idiots.
I agree, and that the moderator shouldn't inject his/her opinion, but can ensure that the discussion doesn't get derailed and can call out those who attempt to derail it.

That'd be great! Hey, mods, why don't you set up such a system? I'd be glad and in a new hobby! :D

If you win a debate against me, I'll tell you you did. Usually, it means your argument is strong enough to cause me to reconsider my opinion on an issue and look in to it further.

I doubt the moderators could keep up with that. This is NSG after all.

It would be cool though.. I have mad debate skills I think..

Debate isn't a competition unless it's competitive debating.

Debate in this kind of forum style is an argumentative, ideological conversation. Its purpose is purely the exchange of ideas and reasoning; nothing more or less. Anyone who gains, wins. The only losers are those who refuse to acknowledge other parties and shut their minds off from any prospect of change.

If people really want to know which side won in a debate thread, then the OP can always add a public poll after the arguments have been made. Of course this does not mean that the winners will have succeeded in changing the opinion of those debating against them. It just indicates that they they have been one of:
a) more persuasive;
b) more popular;
c) less irritating;
d) luckier.

If people really want to know which side won in a debate thread, then the OP can always add a public poll after the arguments have been made. Of course this does not mean that the winners will have succeeded in changing the opinion of those debating against them. It just indicates that they they have been one of:
a) more persuasive;
b) more popular;
c) less irritating;
d) luckier.

Exactly. Well, or more skilled and less inclined to fallacies...

Exactly. Well, or more skilled and less inclined to fallacies...
Outside of the world of the US College Debate, we tend to focus more on content than on procedure.

So... we can neither win nor lose, but, swing in both directions depending on the circumstances.

Does this include prision sex?

Trilby63;11633237']I doubt the moderators could keep up with that. This is NSG after all.

It would be cool though.. I have mad debate skills I think..

they wouldnt have to do all or even most threads.

if a thread seems to be full of serious debate (for a change) a moderator could declare it to be "debate moderated" open for another 24 or 48 hours and to be judged at the end based only on the content of the thread.

it would be a fun change of pace from the times when you make a killer post and its ignored because challenging it is too hard and there are plenty of stupid points to refute. or those where someone comes in and says "ya but clinton...." and tries to hijack it. the moderator could toss out any nonrelevant posts.

How Do you Decide an Argument Winner?
Easy. The winner is the person who learns something they didn't know before, especially about themselves.

The loser is the one who learns nothing.

The winner of an arguement is whoever can make the other cry.

Outside of the world of the US College Debate, we tend to focus more on content than on procedure.

But content is also procedure...