Visa Versa

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 7:59 am

Could someone please explain what masturbation has to do with this thread?

Take it elsewhere please.

CM · Post by CM » Wed Jul 24, 2002 7:59 am

LMAO!!!
You finally had the guts to post it.

And you made me pm fable for nothing

Ode to a Grasshopper · Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:02 am

@Sleep-It was Cuddle Man's comment about needing to practice that set it off...
I think everything that could have been said had already been said anyways.

Except for this.
Poor kittens.

LOL@Kam! I think I'll print that off and stick it up outside our local church next Sunday...

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:03 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Could someone please explain what masturbation has to do with this thread? Take it elsewhere please.

Umm...CM was getting confused and I thought I'd...oh hell it has nothing to do with this thread. Is that what you wanted to hear?

You did say this was probably gonna turn into a spam thread - I was just tryingto make you wish come true

Sorry...

@CM: Firstly, I didn't make you PM fable - I believe you came up with the idea all on your own...

And I never said I wasn't going to post it, just that I would make a few alterations...

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:06 am

Originally posted by Ode to a Grasshopper
Poor kittens.

LOL@Kam! I think I'll print that off and stick it up outside our local church next Sunday...

Who cares about the kittens - I'm on a crusade to make sure all those Domo-kuns get the chop

And if you really want to maximise the shock value - I suggest you find the original unaltered version of the second picture

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:09 am

Originally posted by Kameleon
Umm...CM was getting confused and I thought I'd...oh hell it has nothing to do with this thread. Is that what you wanted to hear? You did say this was probably gonna turn into a spam thread - I was just tryingto make you wish come true Sorry...

Well can we get back on topic until we have the debate set up, then this thread will probably become more spam orientated.

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:14 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Well can we get back on topic until we have the debate set up, then this thread will probably become more spam orientated.

No problem - just think of the whole thing as warm-up for the character assassination of Fas

McBane · Post by **McBane** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:16 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep

Well can we get back on topic until we have the debate set up, then this thread will probably become more spam orientated.

Maybe this could be one of your debates? To kill kittens or not?

Kameleon · Post by **Kameleon** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 8:24 am

Originally posted by McBane
Maybe this could be one of your debates? To kill kittens or not?

Well, you would have to find a team who believes strongly that you should so that they can take the "Don't kill kittens" side...

Tom · Post by **Tom** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 10:56 am

Things are not looking good.

The judge has come under the influence of CEs womanly wiles and I'm being set up for a big fall (come on guys - I don't se what use having a limited knowledge of Russell’s theory of names and other obscure theories will be.)

And now HLD wants to join forces with CE (without her knowing it though)

Let me warn you HLD, once you have dealt with the devil…

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 11:04 am

Originally posted by Tom
The judge has come under the influence of CEs womanly wiles and I'm being set up for a big fall (come on guys - I don't se what use having a limited knowledge of Russell’s theory of names and other obscure theories will be.)

More sandbagging.

And now HLD wants to join forces with CE (without her knowing it though)

Actually, C Elegans was the one who suggested that she, fable and I should form one team for this exercise.

Let me warn you HLD, ones you have dealt with the devil…

At least she looks good in spandex . . .

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:54 pm

Originally posted by Tom
Things are not looking good.

The judge has come under the influence of CEs womanly wiles and I'm being set up for a big fall (come on guys - I don't se what use having a limited knowledge of Russell’s theory of names and other obscure theories will be.)

And now HLD wants to join forces with CE (without her knowing it though)

Let me warn you HLD, once you have dealt with the devil…

Influence and appreciation are two different things, i was merely saying that she would look better in spandex than you, not whether that will sway my opinions or not...Russell's theory, is that Kurt Russell, doesn't his theory state something about sitting out on the porch wearing a lumber jacket while sipping Beer?

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 1:59 pm

Here is my speculative ideas/rules, dissect at your pleasure, i will only alter it if i think the idea is a reasnoable one...so here we are:

Idea:

Have a discussion from two points of view, take a topic, any topic, argue the fore/against arguement and then swap sides; argue the opposite tangent of the topic. The winner of the particular debate will be the one who can convincingly argue for both sides of the topic, so you may be strong on the fore side but once swapped around to the against you begin to struggle.

We could also do it so that there is no swapping of sides and it is just 1 on 1, the choice is up to the punters. The punters have spoken and it is one on one

Rules:

The debate will be conducted in pairs and we will hopefully find a method of randomly choosing these, although it might become a paper-in-hate job.

There will be three replies by each debater, these will be no longer than(speculatively) 2000 words.

The topics will be created by Mr Sleep and Yshania, they are just for the debaters at hand, if anyone other than the selected debaters want to get involved in the subject they are free to take the subject and transfer it to a new thread.

The choice of who wins is up to Mr Sleep and Yshania (may add more later?) the conclusion by Mr Sleep and Yshania is final. If there is any problems with the conclusion then PMs are the preffered form of communication.

There will be a summary made by the adjudicators that encompasses the discussion (there may also be a numerical indication, we would have to discuss fields)

The winner of the debated topic is the person who can argue convincingly for either side.

The idea is to have fun, abide by the forum rules.

Character assasination is allowed although not to ridiculous degrees and not just plain insults, it has to be creative and amusing. Everyone involved understands that the character assasination is part of the game and not personal. If at some point someone feels they have been wronged then again PM is the mode for this or contact the adjudicators.

This isn't a competition as such, there aren't necessarily any winners or losers, we might tally up some scores at some point but they will be token scores that aren't overly important.

As discussed by C Elegans, nearly all tactics are allowed, these include:

Character assasination
Logical fallacies
Circular logic
Mock indignation?

Any more?

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:04 pm

I am a little distracted tonight...but I had another idea. Instead of handicapping per se, how about throwing in an element of role playing?

As a for instance, Ode's recent thread on state versus public schools...what about we suggest one party argue from a teachers point of view, and one from a pupils? It may very well complicate in some subjects so should be dropped, but in others it could provide an amusing twist...just a thought!

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:45 pm

Originally posted by Yshania
I am a little distracted tonight...but I had another idea. Instead of handicapping per se, how about throwing in an element of role playing? As a for instance, Ode's recent thread on state versus public schools...what about we suggest one party argue from a teachers point of view, and one from a pupils? It may very well complicate in some subjects so should be dropped, but in others it could provide an amusing twist...just a thought!

Would it be necessary for the pupil to be in the "Role", loud mouthed, bolshy, controlled by hormones, rebelling, immature...or is that just reserved for Tom

(this wont be a habit, just one

)

I am not sure i understand what you mean...you might have to explain it for my layman intellect

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:57 pm

Originally posted by Mr Sleep

Would it be necessary for the pupil to be in the "Role", loud mouthed, bolshy, controlled by hormones, rebelling, immature...or is that just reserved for Tom (this wont be a habit, just one )

I am not sure i understand what you mean...you might have to explain it for my layman intellect

Yes 'role playing'

Indeed , it would depend on the subject, but it could be fun

Ok, another example. We discuss the existance of a two party state, we could have a conservative and a more liberal point of view...staying in character until the swap of argument - or staying in character throughout?

One idea I had was music over decades. I may suggest this discussion yet. I was thinking along the lines of how music directs youth, attitude and trend...with a 50's rocker represented, a 60's hippie, a 70's punk and and 80's New Romantic

or bring it forward to employ a 90's rap fan. Whatever - it is just a thought

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:59 pm

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Would it be necessary for the pupil to be in the "Role", loud mouthed, bolshy, controlled by hormones, rebelling, immature...or is that just reserved for Tom

Flaming, humiliating, ridiculing, or belittling other members will not be tolerated. If you have an issue with another member, take it to private messages or email.

Bad boy Mr Sleep...bad boy. Nwah ha ha my revenge is complete

Anyway, I don't think we should have to argue both sides of the case...The audience will expect both arguments to be different, not just the same thing written down twice by two different people. Therefore, if somebody creates an argument, which by coincidence is exactly the one that their opponent wanted to use, they are forcing their opponent to abandon his good argument and use a different, likely worse one. We just need to find some issues which two of us have different opinions on.
I am less in favour of fairness and randomness and more in favour of fun. I would rather that Sleepy and Ysh just picked issues and people deliberately to try and get a good argument out.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 4:08 pm

@Ysh, i understand, sounds like a plan

@Frogus, I think i agree, we should just leave one side arguing for their nominated position, i have changed my mind on my original plan and agree with you and CE on the one side method.

But randomness is fun!

Bloodstalker · Post by **Bloodstalker** » Wed Jul 24, 2002 4:13 pm

Argue all you people want, when you are through, I will be glad to prove you all wrong anyway.

*leaves one step ahead of an angry mob*

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Jul 25, 2002 11:24 am

From CM's Secular Law thread:

Originally posted by Tom
Yes it is important that the person wasn’t hit but the reason why he wasn’t hit is at least as important if not more important I think.

Consider this.

Situation 1. A little girl is drowning in a lake and a man sees her jumps in and rescues her. He did it because she was going to drown.

Situation 2. A little girl is drowning in a lake and a man sees her. He thinks "why should I safe her I will get wet". He then sees a beautiful woman looking at the scene. He jumps in and saves the girl. He did it because he believed the beautiful woman would be impressed.

Do we assign the same moral value to the two situations?

I wouldn't.

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
You really are good at this kind of thing

This is why Tom shouldn't be allowed to use the words "if", "the" and "and". I think we should amend this rule and prohibit him from using "is" as well.