It would be set up in the private thread area. I will explian the reasoning of that later.

Basicaly, it would be a thread for debates, however, there would be a moderator set up as a judicator(sp? someone to keep the debates civil) who would make sure the debates stay in the proper format (i.e. both sides listening to each other and backing up their statements with proof).

if one person brings up a wild, non backed up statement, they will get a warning. If they get two warnings, their password will get disabled from the debate forums for one week.

If they get another two warnings after the temp restriction, they will be perma banned from the debate forums.

If there is a grave offence however, that user may be able to be banned from the actual forum site.

How about "no"?

I come to the forums for the discussion/debate that I've come to know/love/hate on these forums. If you want structured, timed debate, then join your school's debate program if it exists.

^^^ what he said.

i didn't say timed, I said civil so the dabates will actual stay on topic and not turn into flame wars.

It is my opinion that many forum members would not be able to handle a forum that encouraged so called "debating."

We wouldn't really have to if people would learn to be a tad more civil in debates. I've seen it done on these forums. It just needs to happen more.

Even so, we have enough forums as is. I don't want to have ANOTHER forum to check everytime I come here just so I can get all riled up and start speaking in tounges to my monitor.

You're trying to do what many admins realize they cannot do--stop flame wars.

Then, all that would happen, is the debate forum would become the flame war forum. So I'm with tracer...

Online forums are not the place to restrict people into "staying on topic". That sort of debate is really dull and constrained in every arena except high school/college debate which sometimes consists of speaking really fast and throwing paper behind yourself as you try to make the other team wet their pants.

something i forgot to add would was that debates that start to turn into flame wars would be shut down, and any user suspected of delibereately trying to turn it into a flame war would get a warning.

I am sorry, but I have to do this. In the thread on the strictness of rules around here, you posted:



Not once did you ever offer any proof or evidence to back your statement, even after others expressed their doubts about its validity.

This is why I do not think a debate forum will work; this is also why the Relgious Discussion Forum was closed. There are simply too many people around here that, without even realizing it, do not hold themselves to the same standards they think everyone else should be held to.

Another site I visit has a 'trash' forum. Basicly, whenever a thread is to be deleted, instead, the admins move it into the trash. The trash forum is completely unmoderated. People can swear, flame eachother, etc. It's quite funny, really. :p

Um... no. There is no reason why good, thought out debates can't happen here.

And banning people from the forum if they don't back up their statements? wtf

from that particular forum.

read the whole post.

Duh. I know what you were saying, and I think it is a rediculous idea.

if you read the whole thing, it would only be the repeat offenders, and also, there is an poll option for having a debate forum only in a different way to how i discribed it.

He read the whole thing, and he thought it was a ridiculous idea. So do I. Jeez.

The Trash forum, on the other hand...

Debates are just heated discussions as far as I'm concerned.

Why? Exactly what would creating this so-called "debate forum" accomplish?

ask and you shall recieve.

Australia

http://www.immi.gov.au/multicultural/cma/

(this was on the first page of a basic worldwide altavista search)

I will get back to you on america when I find its section on multiculturalism on the government website.

If people can't handle debates here, what makes you think that they could handle it in a separate form that proably most admins wouldn't bother too look at?

You completely missed my point. I wasnt asking you to provide the information (especially not here in this thread, where it has absolutely no pertinance to the discussion at hand at all), but pointing out that you think people who do not back up their claims should not be allowed to participate in debates, when you do the same exact thing that you are saying makes people incompetent.

The problem here isnt one specific example that I've pointed out... Honestly, I dont think that every post in a debate should be backed up with concrete evidence. The problem is that too many people here call each other out on their faults without realizing that they make many of the same mistakes themselves.

This is the debate forum.

If you moved all the debates somewhere else, what the hell would this forum be used for? .

A forum full of "POST UR SOCKS LOL!"?

It's the controversial topics that make for the best threads.



So what?
Tell them that.


Closing the religious forum only brought the religious topics in here, and the debateophobes sure don't like that. Instead of being anal about a crapload of 'rules', perhaps you should encourage debate while explaining how they should debate to the individuals that don't seem to understand it.