NationStates Jolt Archive

RP threads ahve addressed all sorts of roles to play. The idea of a debate competition of sorts has come up many times.

RP threads are permitted to set rules of interaction, to have unrelated comments removed and allows ownership of a thread, and allows people to express opinions they wouldn't otherwise hold or be able to argue. Would it be possible to have a debate competition of sorts in the RP forum?

Would it be In-Character or related to In-Character activities out of character?

Because if not it should stay out. Keep all the political bantering in General...

No matter what, threads in NS and II are either In-Character or directly related to IC things (OOC threads and the like.) Real-life debate would be misplaced there, rules of competition or not. I don't want to be writing a story of mine and reading those of others only to come across a "Should Bush Be Impeached?" thread, civilized and intelligently spoken or not.

Roleplaying, in the NS and II forums, is an escape from the ridiculousness of our world. Please don't bring that General Forum nonsense to our escape.

[/not a mod, however a concerned and active member of the NS forum]

Real life debate should be kept in general. Honestly, if real life issues start coming up in an rp forum, then people will end up being insulted because its something that is directly connected to them personally. If they want to debate, go to general. If you want to roleplay as in 'fantasy'...'not real'...'just for fun'...'like a game'...then go to the rp forum.

I think that the place for real life issues is in general. The rp forum is to role play with your nation as a game, not to address any personal issues.

Real life debate should be kept in general. Honestly, if real life issues start coming up in an rp forum, then people will end up being insulted because its something that is directly connected to them personally. If they want to debate, go to general. If you want to roleplay as in 'fantasy'...'not real'...'just for fun'...'like a game'...then go to the rp forum.

I think that the place for real life issues is in general. The rp forum is to role play with your nation as a game, not to address any personal issues.

Debate is a game and it's what I'm talking about. Not about changing the world, but the actual contest called debate, according to rules, just like people compete in while in high school and college. However, such a competition would require a level of control not available in general.

Debate is a game and it's what I'm talking about. Not about changing the world, but the actual contest called debate, according to rules, just like people compete in while in high school and college. However, such a competition would require a level of control not available in general.

Its still real life shit in a roleplaying forum...

Agreed on keeping debate in General where it belongs. As for asking to have the same 'ownership' rules apply, I think it would only encourage more of an atmosphere of elitism, encourage even more veiled barbs under the cover of assumed 'protection', and would serve to effectively muffle opposing views, which is rather against the whole spirit of debate.

You've got a whole forum that's filled to the brim with real and imagined debate and discussion. Why the desire to mix it with the rp? Isn't having a division the point in having various forums? I think a good many who rp would be more than a little put out to have to share those forums with General 'debate' topics. I know quite a few players who avoid General just so they don't have to see the latest rash of 'this race/gender pref/religion/belief/happening offends me' threads. Forcing them to have to put up with it in their rp forums would be unfair. Just as unfair as rp'ers expecting General to play host to their rp threads.

Nor is a new forum needed when General already exists. It isn't as if there's limited space there for desired debate.

EDIT: If you want more control, or to set up a competition scenario, go set up your own forum like so many other groups from NationStates have done on one of the many free services out there, like Invisionfree or the like. If alliances, regions, etc can do it, so can you for your focus group.

Sadly, NS and II are for in character interactions. Specifically, dealing with citizens of your Nationstates nation. You and I debating, say, gun control would have no place in either of those forums.

Emperor David Bivens of Steel Butterfly debating gun control with the Nominal Head of the Oligarchy, Josef Specter of the Hack would fit. It would probably be really strange, but it would be appropriate to the forum.

If you want to have a real debate, I see you as having two options. 1) Post it in General (perhaps with a polite request that the peanut gallery be quiet) and completely ignore idiot comments, or 2) brave the wilds of Jolt and head over to Serious Discussions (http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=1038).

Edit: Or, Nathi's idea for an off-site forum.

Agreed on keeping debate in General where it belongs. As for asking to have the same 'ownership' rules apply, I think it would only encourage more of an atmosphere of elitism, encourage even more veiled barbs under the cover of assumed 'protection', and would serve to effectively muffle opposing views, which is rather against the whole spirit of debate.

You've got a whole forum that's filled to the brim with real and imagined debate and discussion. Why the desire to mix it with the rp? Isn't having a division the point in having various forums? I think a good many who rp would be more than a little put out to have to share those forums with General 'debate' topics. I know quite a few players who avoid General just so they don't have to see the latest rash of 'this race/gender pref/religion/belief/happening offends me' threads. Forcing them to have to put up with it in their rp forums would be unfair. Just as unfair as rp'ers expecting General to play host to their rp threads.

Nor is a new forum needed when General already exists. It isn't as if there's limited space there for desired debate.


It's actually relatively easy to control such things in a controlled debate. The rules are simply applied equally. Sarcasm and velied barbs aren't illegal but don't score points. What it does is force people to come iwth debate instead of preaching which is what is more likely to drive a debate into the ground. (Preaching here refers to any dogmatic view that is not supported, not in any way referring to religious views specifically)

Sadly, NS and II are for in character interactions. Specifically, dealing with citizens of your Nationstates nation. You and I debating, say, gun control would have no place in either of those forums.

Emperor David Bivens of Steel Butterfly debating gun control with the Nominal Head of the Oligarchy, Josef Specter of the Hack would fit. It would probably be really strange, but it would be appropriate to the forum.

If you want to have a real debate, I see you as having two options. 1) Post it in General (perhaps with a polite request that the peanut gallery be quiet) and completely ignore idiot comments, or 2) brave the wilds of Jolt and head over to Serious Discussions (http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=1038).

Edit: Or, Nathi's idea for an off-site forum.

Well, perhaps it could be done as in the example you're referring to. In deate competitions, you basically take on a persona and are required to debate sides of issues that you may not actually hold to be true.

Well, perhaps it could be done as in the example you're referring to. In deate competitions, you basically take on a persona and are required to debate sides of issues that you may not actually hold to be true.

I don't know why you're still trying to tell us what you wanted to do, you seem to have made that very clear and it's not roleplay. Therefore as it's been said a few times already, doesn't belong in NS or II. You can post in General if you feel like risking it, or as Nathi suggested create an Invisionfree forum if you hold ultimate control in high regard.

Either General, or Invisionfree tend to be sensible opinions, in my opinion.

-- Player of Austar Union

Well, perhaps it could be done as in the example you're referring to. In deate competitions, you basically take on a persona and are required to debate sides of issues that you may not actually hold to be true.

It would still, ultimately, be a thin guise for your original suggestion. Emperor Bivens would not debate Josef Specter (using Hack's amusing example) by way of essay-like posts as seen in General. They would have to find a way to host the debate (communications or in person?), be sure that the security is tight (given that they are well-known public figures), and have personal reactions to what the other person said. There would also most likely be breaks in the debate in which the characters would eat, sleep, and interact with others in a way very unlike what you see in General, and very unlike a debate club.

Well, perhaps it could be done as in the example you're referring to. In deate competitions, you basically take on a persona and are required to debate sides of issues that you may not actually hold to be true.

Right. So set up an offsite forum where you can control the rules, set the guidelines, and enforce them without giving the mods here one more thing to worry about. Given that with what you're requesting, you also open up the 'Moderators do not referee RP' box, thus perhaps making it more difficult than you might think to keep things in line.

RP threads ahve addressed all sorts of roles to play. The idea of a debate competition of sorts has come up many times.

RP threads are permitted to set rules of interaction, to have unrelated comments removed and allows ownership of a thread, and allows people to express opinions they wouldn't otherwise hold or be able to argue. Would it be possible to have a debate competition of sorts in the RP forum?

No.

Well, perhaps it could be done as in the example you're referring to. In deate competitions, you basically take on a persona and are required to debate sides of issues that you may not actually hold to be true.Yes, I'm well aware. Incidentally, I frequently do better when debating a side I don't believe in. Still, even taking a viewpoint you oppose isn't the kind of roleplay we do on Nationstates.

I'm in a Warhammer: Fantasy game. If all the players started playing our game on NS, it would be deleted. It's clearly roleplay, but it's not the right kind. The people who keep trying to use NS to do historical reinactments ("I'll be Germany, you be Poland <snicker>") or fantasy reinactments ("Okay, I'll be Luke Skywalker, you can be Han Solo.") are also roleplaying, but not the kind of roleplay we allow on Nationstates. Nationstates roleplay is distinctly tied to your nation. Josef Specter and Emperor Bivens are citizens of The Most Glorious Hack and Steel Butterfly respectively. If our nations didn't exist, neither would the characters.

That's why the kind of debate you're wanting isn't going to cut it in NS or II. Believe me, I completely sumpathise with your position. I would even be tempted to be involved in a real debate, and I understand that General doesn't really have the culture you're looking for, but it just doesn't rise to the level for NS or II to house it.

I don't know why you're still trying to tell us what you wanted to do, you seem to have made that very clear and it's not roleplay. Therefore as it's been said a few times already, doesn't belong in NS or II. You can post in General if you feel like risking it, or as Nathi suggested create an Invisionfree forum if you hold ultimate control in high regard.

Either General, or Invisionfree tend to be sensible opinions, in my opinion.

-- Player of Austar Union

Um, I'm sorry if you don't like to actually read, but I was replying to what was said.

Emperor David Bivens of Steel Butterfly debating gun control with the Nominal Head of the Oligarchy, Josef Specter of the Hack would fit. It would probably be really strange, but it would be appropriate to the forum.

I'm sorry if you don't like what I have to say to the mods or what they have to say to me, but quite frankly, it's none of your business.

Yes, I'm well aware. Incidentally, I frequently do better when debating a side I don't believe in. Still, even taking a viewpoint you oppose isn't the kind of roleplay we do on Nationstates.

I'm in a Warhammer: Fantasy game. If all the players started playing our game on NS, it would be deleted. It's clearly roleplay, but it's not the right kind. The people who keep trying to use NS to do historical reinactments ("I'll be Germany, you be Poland <snicker>") or fantasy reinactments ("Okay, I'll be Luke Skywalker, you can be Han Solo.") are also roleplaying, but not the kind of roleplay we allow on Nationstates. Nationstates roleplay is distinctly tied to your nation. Josef Specter and Emperor Bivens are citizens of The Most Glorious Hack and Steel Butterfly respectively. If our nations didn't exist, neither would the characters.

That's why the kind of debate you're wanting isn't going to cut it in NS or II. Believe me, I completely sumpathise with your position. I would even be tempted to be involved in a real debate, and I understand that General doesn't really have the culture you're looking for, but it just doesn't rise to the level for NS or II to house it.

Ah, okay. So even though you gave the example, you couldn't open a thread specifically designed for Josef Specter and Emporer Bivens to debate. Fair enough. Serious discussion on jolt doesn't do it either since it allows people to just come on and say "the US sucks" or "the us is great" with no support.

Would it be permitted to make it known that such a debate was going on, if I prepared a forum? It's not as if preparing such a forum is all that difficult.

Emperor David Bivens of Steel Butterfly debating gun control with the Nominal Head of the Oligarchy, Josef Specter of the Hack would fit. It would probably be really strange, but it would be appropriate to the forum.

I'm sorry if you don't like what I have to say to the mods or what they have to say to me, but quite frankly, it's none of your business.

How are the mod's none of Hack's business?

Would it be permitted to make it known that such a debate was going on, if I prepared a forum? It's not as if preparing such a forum is all that difficult.

I can only assume that it would be...

Ah, okay. So even though you gave the example, you couldn't open a thread specifically designed for Josef Specter and Emporer Bivens to debate.Er... no, I could. They are citizens of Nationstates nations. They're characters, not political positions. Furthermore, as SB mentioned, chances are, the thread would be considerably more than just endless quoting of stats and anecdotal evidence. There would be the planning (done in character), travel (done in character), arrival (done in character), the debate itself (done in character), breaks during the debate (done in character), the moderator (done in character), so on and so forth.

Fair enough. Serious discussion on jolt doesn't do it either since it allows people to just come on and say "the US sucks" or "the us is great" with no support.Well, yes, I know there's that limitation. However, if you and another structure it, it might not be as bad as you fear (depending, of course, on the subject matter). There's always goons and idiots (even in the IC forums), but they can be ignored.

Would it be permitted to make it known that such a debate was going on, if I prepared a forum? It's not as if preparing such a forum is all that difficult.Hm. Yeah, that should be okay. Link-in-sig would be wise, of course. Just don't make it too spammy and such.

Um, I'm sorry if you don't like to actually read, but I was replying to what was said.

Oh, my bad. Because I never actually read, I mistook you for making actual suggestions where you could post your debate game in roleplay forums. I guess I was mistaken, and this thread is nothing more than... what again? :rolleyes:

Please.

I'm sorry if you don't like what I have to say to the mods or what they have to say to me, but quite frankly, it's none of your business.

And this came from where?

Bah...no need for bickering, gentlemen.

...and on that note...is there really any more need for discussion? Hack seems to have closed the issue multiple times...

How are the mod's none of Hack's business?



I can only assume that it would be...

I was quoting Hack to Austar, not speaking to Hack. And my response intending to embrace what appeared to be a suggestion of Hack's is none of AU's business.

We just stopped NS and II from becoming General...lets not attempt to give Moderation the gruesome fate now by bickering...

Er... no, I could. They are citizens of Nationstates nations. They're characters, not political positions. Furthermore, as SB mentioned, chances are, the thread would be considerably more than just endless quoting of stats and anecdotal evidence. There would be the planning (done in character), travel (done in character), arrival (done in character), the debate itself (done in character), breaks during the debate (done in character), the moderator (done in character), so on and so forth.

Well, yes, I know there's that limitation. However, if you and another structure it, it might not be as bad as you fear (depending, of course, on the subject matter). There's always goons and idiots (even in the IC forums), but they can be ignored.

Hm. Yeah, that should be okay. Link-in-sig would be wise, of course. Just don't make it too spammy and such.


Thank you and you are welcome to close the thread, if you like. I got my answer and you were very helpful.

Glad I could help. Much better than the old MODZ R TEH BIAS! nonsense.