[Discussion] Next Coliseum Match!

[Lagmonster]

I received the following statement via PM which I think should be repeated here:

"With the Prop. 8 debate with Kodiak brought to an abrupt and satisfactory end, the Coliseum is again in danger of falling into disuse. The only other issue that's been brought up that appears to have two well-defined sides with willing participants would be a McCain vs Obama debate as CaptainChewbacca promised he would do at some point. Even if it's still not a good time for him right now, would it really be too forward to ask him for a commitment to a specific date to start the debate on? The election is less than a month away."

[Ghost Rider]

Let's keep taking suggestions, but the board needs a few more kinks getting out. So anyone want to put a suggestion at least up for a vote or no particularly popular one sticking out?

[Surlethe]

A plebe comments:

Hello,

The Coliseum board and the discussion in the Senate as regards it, seems to continue to be stuck in a lack of direction. I just had a small idea for a debate and, hell, I may as well tell it to someone on the off chance it might make a good one.

A number of times in the past I've seen discussions have come up as regards the southern states of the US. Usually someone posts a news piece that shows Southerners doing something considered "typically southern", then someone gets up in arms about the portrayal of said Southerners and it all tends to petter out without any real focus or conclusion before repeating itself sometime later.

Seeing as the Coliseum was set up to allow intelligent discussion and allow the chance for a subject to be debated properly, without pile-ons, needling or any other distractions, perhaps a debate as regards modern Southern culture would provide not only an interesting topic but also draw something of a line under what appears to be a recurring tangent whenever the South is brought up. There does seem to be a number of well-regarded and intelligent people who are all too willing to either damn or defend the South in regular topics, so perhaps a debate will allow them a greater forum to make their case.

Thanks for reading,

Masami von Weizegger

I think there's some merit to it. Right now, there seems to be a little something going on in the "Obama bus pulled over in MS" onion thread about stereotypes and whatnot, and it bears working out.

[Imperial Overlord]

If we are going to have the proposed Chewie versus frigidmagi debate, we need to get the ball rolling before the election is over.

[Surlethe]

If we are going to have the proposed Chewie versus frigidmagi debate, we need to get the ball rolling before the election is over.

Well, barring either candidate withdrawing consent, I move that we vote on such a debate.

[CmdrWilkens]

If we are going to have the proposed Chewie versus frigidmagi debate, we need to get the ball rolling before the election is over.

Well, barring either candidate withdrawing consent, I move that we vote on such a debate.

There is a motion on the floor is there a second?

[The Yosemite Bear]

Thunderdome!, Thunderdome!, Thunderdome!

(bear seconding)

[Surlethe]

We have a second; shall we put the question to a vote?

[Imperial Overlord]

Aye!

[Surlethe]

I hate to back this up, but CaptainChewbacca just emailed me. He's far too busy between now and mid-November, and has been for some time, so he needs to pull out. Is there anyone else who could take the McCain side? Perhaps invite someone from another board?

[CmdrWilkens]

For simplicity sake if anybody does find a replacement who is willign to take the pro-McCain position please simply PM the name to me and I will open the poll once I get it.

[CmdrWilkens]

Just a note, I got a PM from a board member who has an of-board person who would be heavily pro McCain. If everyone is cool about opening up the Coliseum to an off board challenge my inclination is to give this the green light.

[The Yosemite Bear]

hmm fresh meat

[Knife]

I would open up the possibility of a prop 8 debate considering the threads in various forums.

[K. A. Pital]

I've been PMed a few times about possible Coliseum debates, but nothing seems to proceed any further...

I assume the McCain/Obama debate idea died since elections are over, right?

[Surlethe]

I've been PMed a few times about possible Coliseum debates, but nothing seems to proceed any further...

Unfortunately. If I knew much about Russia, or even the economics of communism, I would take you up.

By the way, RedImperator respectfully declined. I believe his exact words were, "... go find yourself some other sucker."

I assume the McCain/Obama debate idea died since elections are over, right?

Not necessarily. We could have still do such a debate in theory. Or we could move on to how Obama will fare in office, something of that nature.

[Surlethe]

A PM:

An idea for a coliseum match:

Something about the Economy. Invite some of the economists of SDN to debate about what needs to be done to fix the economy- you'd have to find some sort of divisive issue, like the bailout or protectionism or the like.

It's the one thing we really can't be sure about because if we knew for sure and it were directly provable easily we'd have cushy government jobs with the Fed, but I'm sure an intelligent debater could philosophically and historically and statistically prove their position.

[Surlethe]

Aaand more PMs:

Another idea for a Coliseum match: Windows vs Linux. This seems only half serious on the surface and might not be best for the SDN coliseum, but there is potential for some kind of interesting debate there.

I was wondering if an idea of asking people to debate AGAINST their personal stand will be a much better option instead.

This is a good way to let people cool down when they are debating something sensitive to themselves. When you are debating against your personal stand, you will be forced to cool down in order to debate. You have to think before bringing up a proposal.

I'm not sure where I stand on this second one; I find debating against the position I actually hold to be an academic exercise at best.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And...

Another Coliseum proposal:

Honorable Senators,

I hereby do propose and challenge that someone engage me on the subject of the evolution of religion. Specifically, on distinguishing whether religion at different temporal scales best fits an evolutionary spandrel hypothesis, a mutualistic hypothesis, or the parasitic meme hypothesis. My position being that religious belief systems originated as a neutral byproduct of adaptive cognitive processes, and were attached to (and became mutualistic with) human cultural systems. Later, after a lot of divergence,I will split hairs and take the position that it depends on the religion whether or not is is adaptive, neutral, or maladaptive.

~Alyrium
November 11, Year of Our Darwin 199

[Simplicius]

I wonder if we're going about this Coliseum business in the wrong way. By soliciting topics and then trying to find volunteers to debate it, or by having someone pick a pet topic and asking if anyone would like to debate them on it, the process takes too long and none of the topics proposed stay fresh enough for action to be taken - if two people ever even decide to take positions against each other, which happens rarely enough.

Inspired by the proposed revitalization of the Horsemen, I say we take the Coliseum less seriously and let it be a little more free-wheeling. I say we treat it like a dueling ground and let topics come from the general debate forums; anyone can challenge anyone else on any topic at any time, and if the challenge is accepted we just give it a quick Yes or No before it goes into the arena. It's already understood that the Coliseum is meant for in-depth debates so I don't think we'll have to weed out joke topics, and it will also encourage people who want to prove themselves at debate to get in on the game, and even acceptably re-hash old topics without cluttering up the individual forums with redundancy, since the showcase is the debaters rather than the topic itself.

What say ye?

[Simplicius]

Count Chocula weighs in:

I say "aye," it reminds me of the standard bartender phrase, "Take it outside!" Only, rather than dueling with fists and feet on a sidewalk, it'll be keyboards at twenty paces.

We'd probably have to ask a challenger or challenge-ee to PM a Senator with a link to the challenge so we know one has been made and accepted, but I don't think that's such a big deal.

[fgalkin]

This would tie-in nicely with my proposal to reduce dogpiling, and would bring the forum back from the dead, while putting an emphasis on debate, and giving the plebes oppostunity to make accomplishments they can be proud of, and make a name for themselves by things other than spamming Testing.

I am all for this idea.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Simplicius]

Words from the crowd:

Appoint someone, senator, plebe, or actually anyone with some common sense to accept challenges, check if they're valid. If so, said person will open a thread, announce the schedule of rounds and let it go. This way you can have quick turn around from "idea" to "debate".

Thoughts?

It would be good to have a go-to guy on this. Though I said 'PM a Senator' above, who knows just which of us is online or paying close attention at any given time? It might be worth having from 1 to 3 (depending on popularity and workload) Coliseum Masters to verify challenges, set up, and possibly even referee the debates.

[Knife]

Or tie it in with the Horsemen. Give them authority to put an on going debate, debate the operative word, into the Coliseum that has been bogged down with dog pile and bullshit. The Horsemen can then shit all over dog piles and trolling while the debate can continue in the coliseum by the original debtors.

Discussions and conversations in normal forums that get bogged down with emotion, trolling and other board culture we've been discussion can be 'cut loose' in this manner and separated so the actual points they make are not lost.

[RedImperator]

I think we should do that. Nothing too formal, just let members challenge each other. If the challenge is accepted, they agree to some rules (length of debate, maximum response time, acceptable sources), with the option for someone in the staff to impose conditions if they can't come to an agreement (maybe come up with a standard format for debates that the participants can change if they agree, but otherwise, they stay with the standard). And then let them go to town with just the two of them.

I would add, no commentary threads. The last one was used to dogpile Voluntaryist by proxy; that's hardly fair. It's like letting the spectators at a boxing match throw batteries at the fighter they're rooting against.