Page 5 of 18
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 10:24 am
by C Elegans
Originally posted by Mr Sleep
As far as i am concerned you can use whatever tactic you like, it will just mean extra silliness 
, i might give you bad marks if it is absolutely ludicrous though
Great - green light for
ad hominems (personal attacks) circular logic and
appeal to majority Yes I agree, it will be more fun if we allow rhetorics
Btw, have you hear the "unwritten rule" that if part A uses the (heavily invalid of course) argument that part B is like Hitler/the Nazi's, that means part A has lost the argument
I also vote for Ysh as assisting Sleep in this - but it would certainly be partial of me if I were to assist the assistants
@Ysh: Since all dirty tricks are allowed, no prior knowledge about rules of logics etc will be needed, just take a look at the links I posted earlier in this thread to familiarise yourself with some different tricks
I also agree that this should be a spam thread, where we can discuss and comment the game, whereas the rules and the actual debates should get a new thread.
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 2:55 pm
by Minerva
Originally posted by Tom
otherwise i will sit next to minerva - seems like she knows what she is doing. Congrats on you new home by the way - looks like it will be cool.
Thanks.
Here, have a drink.
<After 2 pints, Minerva begins to wonder why those nasty... err, aggressive looking guys on the ring don't start to punch up each other...>
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:23 pm
by Yshania
Originally posted by C Elegans
Great - green light for ad hominems (personal attacks) circular logic and appeal to majority Yes I agree, it will be more fun if we allow rhetorics
Btw, have you hear the "unwritten rule" that if part A uses the (heavily invalid of course) argument that part B is like Hitler/the Nazi's, that means part A has lost the argument
I also vote for Ysh as assisting Sleep in this - but it would certainly be partial of me if I were to assist the assistants
@Ysh: Since all dirty tricks are allowed, no prior knowledge about rules of logics etc will be needed, just take a look at the links I posted earlier in this thread to familiarise yourself with some different tricks
I also agree that this should be a spam thread, where we can discuss and comment the game, whereas the rules and the actual debates should get a new thread.
Me too if they are kind (ie don't be too hard on poor Dottie
)
Ooh - no extremes then? Not a Mother Theresa versus Adolf? *sigh*. Of course, I agree
whatever the subject, I think the idea is to rationalise both sides without running too far to the extremes, this is too easy
Aw! thank you!
LOL!
*puts hands over ears*
Ok, thanks CE - will do. I am not suggesting I consider them legal though!
Me too
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 4:45 pm
by Georgi
Ok, I am in, though if I get matched against CE or HLD I will go and sit in a corner whimpering...
Also, I don't think it's really relevant that HLD and I both have History degrees, since what we specialised in is probably completely different.
I don't think anybody should get a topic that is their area of expertise.
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 4:57 pm
by C Elegans
posted by Ysh
Me too if they are kind (ie don't be too hard on poor Dottie )
Ooh - no extremes then? Not a Mother Theresa versus Adolf? *sigh*. Of course, I agree whatever the subject, I think the idea is to rationalise both sides without running too far to the extremes, this is too easy
Bah, Dottie is a tough guy, he just likes to play a whimp so that Georgi and other kind-hearted ladies will "Aaaaw" him.
We can of course allow that for fun, I just mentioned it because I think it's a funny "rule" for serious debating. It is actually quite often you will hear people use arguments like that - "this must be wrong because Hitler/Stalin/horrible person of choice thought that". How often haven't you heard the argument "atheism is wrong/immoral since Stalin was an atheist?" People often forget that just because a person is a grim, evil, maneating massmurderer, does not mean they are more wrong in other issues.
by Georgi
Ok, I am in, though if I get matched against CE or HLD I will go and sit in a corner whimpering...
Also, I don't think it's really relevant that HLD and I both have History degrees, since what we specialised in is probably completely different. I don't think anybody should get a topic that is their area of expertise.
I think you are overestimating me (I am actually not very good at all in arguing things I don't really think) and underestimating Tom - IMO he is the person to fear here, the bloody guy is a bloody professional philosopher
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:11 pm
by Georgi
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:19 pm
by Dottie
Originally posted by C Elegans
Bah, Dottie is a tough guy, he just likes to play a whimp so that Georgi and other kind-hearted ladies will "Aaaaw" him.
Good thing im a slow typer, I got halfway through my "defending my true whimpiness post" before I realized what I was doing.
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:24 pm
by C Elegans
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:51 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by Dottie
Good thing im a slow typer, I got halfway through my "defending my true whimpiness post" before I realized what I was doing.
So, the evil tyrant image is coming along nicely?
LOL@CE
I think that my reaction to having to argue against Tom would be far worse than sitting in a corner whimpering
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 5:57 pm
by Dottie
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:02 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by Dottie
Indeed, im learning. Perhaps my previous post was abit out of character though.
Indeed, you should probably be threatening CE with all kinds of cruel and unusual tortures...
Like a private performance of Mary Poppins, starring you...
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:04 pm
by C Elegans
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:08 pm
by Dottie
Originally posted by Georgi
Indeed, you should probably be threatening CE with all kinds of cruel and unusual tortures... Like a private performance of Mary Poppins, starring you...
I think she posess an eerie ability to see through the cruel parts of that and just look to the silly.
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:15 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by C Elegans
Seriously speaking though, I think it would be most fair to match me or HLD to Tom since I figure neither I nor HLD are used to loose an argument and it would be a good exercise...
Ah yes, I think you would make an excellent opponent for Tom
@Dottie The first time through, perhaps, but after the 37th performance, I think she would start to crack...
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:23 pm
by Dottie
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:25 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by Dottie
Unfortunatly im not very fit, Ill probably go down after 1/2.
Hmmm, I'm not sure
that would be torturous for CE
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 6:30 pm
by Dottie
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 8:28 pm
by Georgi
Originally posted by Dottie
I have the feeling i do not fully understand the innuendo here.
I have the feeling explaining it would be a bannable offence
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2002 9:07 pm
by The Z
I have a feeling you're right
Posted: Wed Jul 24, 2002 12:54 am
by Ode to a Grasshopper