Originally posted by Bentley
Way to go off topic Bardock ermmI think giving credit to those who have done some enjoyable and entertaining discussions among us is not childish. The replies can be trollish/limited, but it's a misguided notion to put the thread itself in that concept. Just read the previous posts, most of them are level-headed and honest comments.
I reject the premise of the thread though.
And that's what I mean, if we are talking about enjoyable post that's one thing. But threads in the GDF shouldn't be "debates", imo. People here don't debate arbitrary sides on arbitrary topics.
I mean, I don't want to spoil anyone's fun, I understand lots of people enjoy these kinds of threads (best debater in forum x), I just find them silly, and I don't think they adequately reflect forum culture.
They don't reflect forum culture as a whole, but they reflect a part of forum culture. Excluding it by principle would be random.
Again, talking about the best debater isn't necessarily about who has done the best debates, but about who has the qualities needed to be a good debater (being good at expressing point of views, sticking to arguments, refraining from personal attacks). This can be applied to any place fit to have people engaging in discussions. Forums about open topics are more than fit to spot these qualities.
I don't exclude it, I dismiss it as juvenile.
I have further issues with what even constitutes someone who is good at debating. To me, long term sway is by far the most important aspect of discussions on important topics, which I find hard to quantify at any rate.
Like with rating things on a scale, I think the issue is that we are comparing completely different things. Your idea of a "best debater" is not the same as my idea of a "best debater", and yet these threads treat them all the same.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't exclude it, I dismiss it as juvenile.
It doesn't need to be. I don't think that's the direction the thread is taking (well, we are kind of deviating from the original spirit), hence my first comment. But obviously you can have a different perception on the subject, I definitively see how talking about "the best" on "any topic" goes quickly to over simplification.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Like with rating things on a scale, I think the issue is that we are comparing completely different things. Your idea of a "best debater" is not the same as my idea of a "best debater", and yet these threads treat them all the same.
Yes, but just like in many other subjective discussions, the generalizations are only ridiculous when they detract from the truth. I can tell you that Borges wrote excellent books, and your opinion of what constitutes an excellent literary work may differ from mine, buf if you haven't been paying attention to that particular author, my comment could prove useful.
Comparing debaters or literary works may be vain, or even misleading, but it isn't necessarily meaningless.
Also, I think the idea of us having different considerations and experiences is understood from the get to go when the question is asked. That criticism can apply to any range of discussions.
If I wasn't dealt slices of humble pie on an alarmingly regular basis irl, this thread would probably go to my head. I appreciate the shout-outs, though. Particularly Oneness's post where I'm apparently a professor. Entirely untrue, but nice to know I'm getting imaginary promotions based on my work on an internet discussion forum.
I tend not to think in terms of debate. I talk with people here; nothing more. So I don't have a go-to "this guy was the best." Inamilist has been mentioned a lot, and I'll happily cosign. I'd go into discussions with him knowing he could likely pull me out of my element in a hurry.
The truest debating I've done has been in comic tourneys, where several are my equal or superiors. Leonidas is always excellent. I had a particular envy for Darkcrawler's debating skill in tourneys, though he's not been active for years. Several others with tourney accolades - Scoobless, Blair Wind, Charlotte, Id, Psycho_Gundam, Smurph, others I'm forgetting - as well. I'm not as clever as most of them when it comes to strategies.
I'll be honest and say I don't pay enough attention to vs. battles to have many opinions there. There are likely good debaters I'm leaving out, simply because I'm unaware of their posts.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I always found these kinds of thread childish. They seem to mostly crop up in vs. forums, which are already somewhat pathetic in their own regard.Threads on KMC, exempting perhaps the vs. forums, should not be structured like debates. They are discussions, people with different opinions voicing those, hopefully in an attempt to learn and improve. It's true that they often do devolve into a us vs. them, but in general I don't think what we do is debating in any real, formal sense.
Additionally I don't think that opinions are swayed in single debates, and emphasis on them is misguided.
You are just mad cause you didn't get nominated.
Here: Bardock, the forum's bias liberal poster and resident cultural and racial expert for living in Maine for 6 months.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Here: Bardock, the forum's bias liberal poster and resident cultural and racial expert for living in Maine for 6 months.
haha, h-holy shit!
Originally posted by Bardock42
Thank you, that's all I wanted.
You deserved a nomination, imo.
Bardock42, remember this exchange?
Originally posted by dadudemon
The movie goers in New Jersey all clapped when he did the Hulk Smash...it was obviously in there for the fans.
Originally posted by Bardock42
****ING CHRIST, we get it dadudemon. YOU WATCHED THE ****ING MOVIE IN JERSEY. GET ****ING OVER IT!
Top-notch debating skills.
Edit - I was being serious. That was hilarious/awesome.
Originally posted by Digi
I think the funniest part is that you had expectations to begin with.
The funniest part is clean-up time after Chewbacca gets done pooping.
There are plenty of posters mentioned in this thread that are horrible debaters that couldn't tell the difference between a formal and an informal fallacy to save their lives; and that's not mentioning their constant misuse of fallacies in the first place. On the top of my mind we have Omega Vision who didn't know what a straw man was until a week ago, and dadudemon got so upset after one of our debates that he started to reply to ever post I made to start another debate. It got so bad that I eventually had to block him.
I'm pretty much the only poster here that follows debate decorum and academic rhetoric.
Originally posted by Bardock42I'm too immature to label threads like these "childish", but I'm not overly fond of them myself tbh.
I always found these kinds of thread childish. They seem to mostly crop up in vs. forums, which are already somewhat pathetic in their own regard.Threads on KMC, exempting perhaps the vs. forums, should not be structured like debates. They are discussions, people with different opinions voicing those, hopefully in an attempt to learn and improve. It's true that they often do devolve into a us vs. them, but in general I don't think what we do is debating in any real, formal sense.
Additionally I don't think that opinions are swayed in single debates, and emphasis on them is misguided.
I honestly couldn't really name a single best debater (though I really don't think of people as "debaters" anymore, just posters) on the forum because it is impossible to quantify. I tend to think Omega Vision is pretty good. I think Digi's a **** (not really though, I don't know if we've ever interacted beyond me calling him a **** and claiming he would beat the shit out of Delph in a fight), but he usually knows what he is talking about. Robtard is a shitfaced ****er like me but he's also clever and can present his case well when he wants to. Blax is even more of a shitfaced trolling ****er (maybe even more than me), but I've always respected him as a debater more than almost everyone else (this could be because we're dating though). Gideon, though sarcastic and irreverent, has always been good, as is Stealth Moose. I don't always agree with Q99's shitty opinions but she has always presented her case very well, and uniquely she is probably the most polite poster I've personally debated. dadudemon, despite being a ****, certainly knows more about how discussions and debates work than most posters (which is what makes him such an effective troll).
I'm sure there are more I've forgotten over the years (and maybe even some current posters who are good), but those are a few who come to mind. In the forums that I've frequented anyway, I've never really been a big GDF poster because I am mentally off-balance and don't understand other people well enough to comment on discussions about shit that is actually real or important.
Astner of course is the worst debater on the forum, but we all knew that.