TFN-Challenge for Saxton-debate

FTeik · Post by **FTeik** » 2004-09-01 03:22pm

++http://boards.theforce.net/Literature/b ... 6/p14/?330

On page 14 of the Executor/Star Dreadnought-thread in TFN.lit-forum CooperTFN offered a challange for a debate about Curtis Saxtons approach to SW on something called EU-roundtable. dpm4 will represent the anti-Saxton-faction in a basic 1vs1.

While i´m tempted to participate, i´m not the best debater in a chat and don´t know most of the quotes and sources concerning LFL-canon-policy.

President Sharky · Post by **President Sharky** » 2004-09-01 03:42pm

SD.N should sack them with someone vicious like Vympel, IP, or Ender.

Especially to once again steamroller all of that obnoxious dp4m's arguments.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-01 04:02pm

What??? An anti-Saxton debate? Are they nuts? The most accomplished Star Wars fan ever, who with proper research has refuted tons of erroneous WEG material? Are they even worth engaging in a debate? I fail to see why they want to keep old information that is refuted by the visuals, and they forget that the books are canon!

Sharky, I would like to add Spanky the Dolphin to your list. That person is great in a debate. How about it, Spanky?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2004-09-01 04:06pm

I'd rather set myself on fire than debate on such a self-absorbed, whorish BBS...

Hey TFN, here's a fucking hint: some God damn speculation thread on your shitty idiot box board is NOT NEWS!!

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-01 04:11pm

Debate challenge has been known for a while. Appropriate parties have accepted and are working on it.

FTeik · Post by **FTeik** » 2004-09-01 04:13pm

Thought it was new since the post in the link was made just recently.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-01 04:14pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:I'd rather set myself on fire than debate on such a self-absorbed, whorish BBS...

Hey TFN, here's a fucking hint: some God damn speculation thread on your shitty idiot box board is NOT NEWS!!

Yeah, if I had been any good at debating, I guess I would do so too. It's like debating with a fundamentalist, they always claim victory (well, I guess in some sense that they are fundamentalists).

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-09-01 04:22pm

No, the roundtable appears to be different, Ender. It is a private TFN event; the other is an audio exchange between two parties for the benefit of a comic author for SW.

EDIT: Does anyone think one of us should just go right out and challenge one of these guys to an email debate along the rules I posted?

Darth Garden Gnome · Post by **Darth Garden Gnome** » 2004-09-01 04:27pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Does anyone think one of us should just go right out and challenge one of these guys to an email debate along the rules I posted?

Sounds like a great idea. Smack that idiot down and post the results for all to see. That is, assuming you haven't beaten their arguments before, with the results being ignored by the general populace. In that case, it may just be a big waste of time.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-01 04:28pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote: EDIT: Does anyone think one of us should just go right out and challenge one of these guys to an email debate along the rules I posted?

Yes, absolutely. Go get them! I keep my fingers crossed that you'll defeat them.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-01 04:43pm

I see. In that case, I'm game for an email exchange. Thought I do think Wayne or someone would be best suited. If nothing else, takes care of argument R&D

DocHorror · Post by **DocHorror** » 2004-09-01 05:13pm

When this debate commences will you let us know please?

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 2004-09-01 07:51pm

Go for it. We've had a lot of whining on here about how much they suck over at TFN. Finally an opportunity to take a swing at 'em.

Don't pass it up!

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-09-02 09:28am

*Provides moral support*

Go get ´em, fellas!

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-02 02:09pm

I posted the following
++http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp? ... t=16845739

Provided a reasonable set of conditions to the debate can be set, I will agree to an email based debate. Both sides could CC their arguments to a 3rd party who would post them unaltered for the viewing public.

What I consider reasonable:

A set but reasonable reply by date. I figure 1-2 weeks would be good; a high time for most, but with my deployment schedule possibly a necessary one. Should it appear that one sides internet access will be restricted soon, they could attempt to get a message out to inform and give the other party the option of taking their concession, or ending the debate then to start anew at a later time.

An agreement to follow basic logical debate. None of this Brett Bass style proclaim your opinion as facts and then argue you don't need to back it up because this isn't high school debate. I do not have an excessive amount of free time, I do not wish to spend it slogging throguh subjective dodging. This is a deal breaker.

An agreed, specific topic of discussion. I don't want to start talking ISDs and end up talking order of canon.

An agreed number of rounds, one side then the other. I'm willing to let the other side go first, largely because I'm not really sure what most people want to attack here. From what I have seen, 4 rounds is generally sufficient to make it clear which side has the winning argument.

A limit to argument size. I figure 20K of text only should be acceptable. No one really want to spend all their time slogging back and forth through pages and pages of arguments. Plus my mail service has a limit to message attachment size. Obviously, supporting evidence can be as large as it need be.

Required evidence. Quotes, screen caps, vid clips, audio clips, etc to support. I refuse to artificially handicap myself by having to argue against someone's interpratation when I cannot see the source material to formm my own opinion based on what is actually seen and context. If they person will not provide proof for their point, they concede the debate. This one is a deal breaker.

An agreed upon debate "rating". As in G, PG, PG-13, R. I have seen debates fall apart when the losing party can't defend their point and resort to style over substance fallacies. Don't want that to happen.

An agreed upon standard of canon. Accodring to this board's TOS, what most people here use is in violation of the rules. So we settle down to something hard for the debate. Canon only, movies only, New level canon system, old "closer to the movies" whatever.

All calculations required to prove a point will be explained in sufficient detail. And calculations will be required when one is attempting to quantify a point open to subjective debate.

Real names will be used. I end up putting out my real name with my email, so should they.

If an opponent willing to agree to these terms can be found, drop me an email at krousedp@truman.navy.mil

-Daniel K

Those are more or less Brian's terms, I figure they should be good.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-09-02 05:49pm

+http://boards.theforce.net/Literature/b ... 6779153/p1

+http://boards.theforce.net/Literature/b ... 6779153/p2

This format is a joke; no one has to present any real evidence. It'll just degenerate into set-up media-like discussions filled with attention-grabbers, morons yukking it up, and style-over-substance.

I am leaning on suggesting we protest by boycutting the pro-Saxton slot, and discouraging anyone from assuming it.

+http://www.theforce.net/jedicouncil/rou ... 1rt2.shtml

This is the "debate" we would be subjecting ourselves to. I say it would be better to wait til they have it with some goon standing in for Saxton and dp4m getting his way being an asshole, then call him out on email debate.

The only question is whether he would shy away from it like a pussy.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-09-03 12:08am

What a load of bullshit. Some "debate". I prefer the other one in the works.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2004-09-03 12:33am

Oh, but they want the "spirit" of the debate, not the "technicalities."

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-09-03 02:33am

not the "technicalities."

Which makes perfect sense in a technical discussion.

Mange · Post by **Mange** » 2004-09-03 06:38am

While it seems the "debate" is nothing but Saxton bashing, I hope Ender will continue. The Saxton haters need a good ol' smackdown.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-09-03 06:43am

This may be a rethorical question:

Does the overall hatred towards Saxton stem from the fact that he´s a SW fan being allowed to create/define parts of the overall SW canon and they´re not? If it is, then let me say

HAHAH *points*

Warspite · Post by **Warspite** » 2004-09-03 08:08am

VT-16 wrote:This may be a rethorical question:

Does the overall hatred towards Saxton stem from the fact that he´s a SW fan being allowed to create/define parts of the overall SW canon and they´re not? If it is, then let me say

HAHAH *points*

Although that would be a perfectly valid excuse since the AOTC ICS came out, this Saxton-hating cames from way before that, even before TPM.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2004-09-03 11:16am

VT-16 wrote:Which makes perfect sense in a technical discussion.

What I got from it is that they are not supposed to debate things like "Is the Executor 11 miles long." Rather they want more of a "Does it really matter that much how long it is? Enough to 'rock the boat', so to speak? Perhaps a sleeping dog can be left to lie and not bother our enjoyment of SW?" kind of thing.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-09-03 12:50pm

Mange the Swede wrote:While it seems the "debate" is nothing but Saxton bashing, I hope Ender will continue. The Saxton haters need a good ol' smackdown.

I have yet to check my ship email, but I think Cooper's response makes 2 things very clear:

1) He's a little bitch
2) He picked someone less openly supportive, meaning that they are likely less skilled.

Skewed playing field.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2004-09-03 12:54pm

Ok, so instead of real discussion they want to cuddle up with some pillows and hot cocoa and talk about their own fond memories of SW, "or how we´re all on the same team after all", or some lame shit like that.

Avoiding the issues and playing the it´s-really-silly-and-irrelevant-when-you-think-about-it-game when they can´t win the debate.

Lame.