ILP v. ILO Judges and Contestants

The three judges for the debate are the following:

KrisWest
TheAdlerian
Pavlovianmodel146

I am now looking for volunteers to represent ILP in this debate, please post on this thread (It is now 7:00 p.m. EST on Saturday November 29th) by 7:00 p.m. EST Friday December 5th if you wish to represent ILP.

TOPICS:

Myself and the judges are now collaborating on what topics we will have for the debate. The topics will be announced after the participants have been determined. The judges will also decide what side each site is to take on each individual topic. To ensure fairness, no judge will decide which side a site is to take on a topic that that judge chooses.

KrisWest will decide what side each site takes on my topic.

I will decide what side each site takes on TheAdlerian’s topic.

TheAdlerian will decide what side each site takes on KrisWest’s topic.

I have elected that topics remain secret until the participants are chosen. This debate will ideally result in the three best debaters from each site going head-to-head, so I do not want either site to pick a debater based on strength in one particular topic.

CONTESTANTS:

This will be a 3-on-3, best of three series of debates with each debater posting once per debate. In the event that one site or another wins the first two debates, the third debate will still take place.

In the event that more than three individuals decide to volunteer for either site, there will be a week long period where the members of the site (excluding, of course, the judges) will vote on what three they wish to represent that site.

VOLUNTEERING:

The only rule for volunteering yourself for the debate is that you cannot volunteer to represent at both of the sites, or you will not be considered by either site.

VOTING:

If there are more than three volunteers for each site a vote will be held by members in the following format:

Each member (who so chooses) will pick three of the members who volunteered to represent their site in the debate. Each vote will be worth one, two or three points. The person that you wish most to represent the site will receive three points and so on, here is an example:

1.) PavlovianModel146 (3 Points)
2.) PavlovianModel147 (2 Points)
3.) PavlovianModel148 (1 Point)

That said, let’s start volunteering!!!

Who or what is ILO?

Iloveopinions.com

It is a site much like this one. This will be a good debate.

If I am not mistaken,

Smears
Unreasonable
Sittlichkeit

have already volunteered to represent ILP on the other thread for this debate, so unless they say otherwise, I will count them among the volunteers.

I don’t really know that much about ILO. But I think it sucks.

It does. It’s completely void of any interesting substance. It’s full of a bunch of 20 somethings who circle jerk eachother about conspiracy theories. Go ahead. Start up a thread about any topic. Any topic at all, and you’ll soon be faced with a conspiracy about how a secret organization has manipulated the course of human nature for millenniums such that now this philosophical problem arises. Oh, and the solution is orgonite.

XZC,

That’s cool. If they are so easy to beat I take it you will represent ILP?

I already volunteered once. Here is my second application.

If I’m needed, then I’ll be hiding in my cave. You know where to find me.

The judges leave something to be desired and so do the volunteers. This is really turning out to be a top notch debate.

Also, I suggest you put up a poll when the volunteering deadline is reached, people may be more likely to vote if it’s quick, easy, and anonymous.

P.S. fucking volunteer already.

I’ll throw my hat in the ring.

Yes, unreasonable’s creativity and aggression is a perfect counterbalance to Xunzian’s meticulous knowledge and reason.

I’d like to teach those cantankerous ruffians a thing or two. Do we have team names? Mascots?

Is dunamis arguing on the side of ilo?

If I might offer my services for a brief spell…? I’ll go away again later.

They are still deciding their team but, it is getting narrowed down rather quickly.

Smears
Unreasonable
Sittlichkeit
Carleas
Xunzian
xzc
and the elusive Tabula Rasa
all volunteers, I do believe you all might start voting on teammates.

This is the only thing that thus far inspires me to post on this thread.

Sittlichkeit,

Just a minor correction: “meticulous knowledge” should read “compulsive wiki-ing and googling”. Carry on . . .

Stoppit wid the pokin’ already.

(A near-replica of this post will also appear at ILO)

Voting:

If it comes down to a vote, then each poster with a joined date on or before November 26, 2008 may vote on the three contestants they wish to represent their respective website. There will be a seperate thread for voting.

Rules:

1.) Points will be determined in the order that you vote for people. Your first vote will be worth three points, your second vote will be worth two points and your final vote will be worth one point.

2.) All three of your votes must be on one post.

3.) If a single user attempts to vote twice, neither vote will be considered, I am not going to do an American Idol format here!

4.) You MAY vote for yourself, but a self-vote will only result in one point, regardless of where you position yourself on the voting.

5.) Your vote may not be edited, if it is edited, it will be disregarded.

6.) You may not vote for the same participant multiple times, or your vote will be disregarded. In other words, I could not do this:

1.) PavlovianModel146
2.) PavlovianModel146
3.) PavlovianModel146

7.) You may not vote for participants at both ILP and ILO. Although, if you have two different SN’s, I suppose I can’t stop you. Also, if you volunteer to represent one site, you may not vote at the other site. Again, if you have two different SN’s, I can’t stop you.

Judging:

What the other judges post regarding their tendencies is their business. I am not going to tell anyone what to do to help their position with me, but I will reveal a couple of things that won’t help.

1.) I have an above-average vocabulary, but do not try to impress me with your arsenal of obscure eighteen-letter words. I don’t mind having to go to the dictionary two or three times while reading a post, but if it is an every other word thing, that will not sit well with me.

2.) Bigger and longer is not always better, an eighteen page long post will not earn any favors with me. A point should be stated with great detail, but in as concise a manner as possible. In a traditional debate, there would be time limits for how long you could talk, but I am opting not to set a specific limit to length of posts.

3.) Quoting the other points made by debaters and attempting to counter them one-by-one is not going to particularly impress me. Respect the difference between a well-worded statement and a laundry list.

Putting it to a vote seems a little worthless. Can ILP not come up with a perfect trinity that will compliment each other. Team dynamics need to be considered here, not just who you have a crush on. In this spirit I will make a observation.

Carleas and Xunzian…we need one or the other as they are nearly identical in debate style and belief sets(on salient issues). To have them both, would be equivalent to having the same person twice. To have neither would be to leave our big guns at home. Yet, we have to decide which of these fat boys we want. I will take the first step here and say that Xunzian beats out Carleas…because, well, Carleas is the owner and his defeat would be catastrophic to morale. We must all shield ourselves from that possibility.

The rest of the posters I do not know enough about to juxtapose against each other, but surely someone else does and will do it for me.

There are thousands of us and a couple of them, yet they have 3 pages of incitement discussion, and we have a one page cluster-fuck of volunteers. Get to it!