Compatibilism: Agree that Cause/Effect chain has led us to this point, disagree that future effects have necessarily been pre-determined because choices have not yet been made.
(That’s exactly 25, if you count Cause/Effect as one word due to the slash. If you do not, just take the word, “Has,” out of the first part of the sentence, it’s redundant anyway.)
I disagree with this, so we might have a Debate. I think that even if a group of people fight for their right (to parrrrrttttyyy) that they are equally as likely to throw that right away as they are had it just been given to them.
Hmm, then we might be on actually, because from my point of view, those choices do not matter because the system imposes certain results.
How do you wanna do this…?
The way I typically orchestrate Debates, each participant picks a Judge, and then the two Judges pick a third Judge.
In terms of posting, alternating posts and either three or five posts apiece. I don’t think we necessarily have to impose a time limit between posts, the two of us can probably keep it fairly reasonable.
This site is a mirror strictly for the individual. Using others to define what you think.
Topic: Is community dead?
More specifically, why is a site that brings people together over a shared interest (ideas) steam-rolled by unique differences in thought? Given the many important concepts, how it useful to only know what you disagree with? What is community for? Does it strive towards anything?
Okay, Let’s call it three posts each, cos term’s starting in a week or so, with what, 24 hours between each…?
Judge wise, I choose… Tentative or Anita, whoever says “Gee well, I dunno, okay I guess.” first.
Ok so rules?
Same as above, KrisWest, but I don’t think I am equal to two Debates at once. Therefore, you and Tab will have to discuss who gets a piece first!
I can’t do 24 hours. I mean, I can, but not strictly.
I’m off one day a week, so I typically use it as a day off from every possible thing that is not family-related. I generally don’t even log in those days.
Thanks for considering me, Tab, but I can’t think of anyone less qualified than me, so I defer to the Honorable JT. He’s probably already got a beautiful hand-made gavel all ready and waiting. 
Oh well, if it runs over a week or so, I’m gonna be pushed. So, let’s just do it “ILP essay competition” style and let it take as long as it takes. Worry about judges and shit when we’ve finished. I mean…
…Anita’s already destroyed my chances of winning simply by virtue of having nice hair, so I’ll have to come up with a new strategy. 
[size=50][Sorry - couldn’t resist][/size]
Perhaps we should let the people decide.
After each of our three posts is complete, we’ll put it to an open vote. The votes must be posted and only the votes of individuals with 300+ posts will count.
Okey pokey. =D>
Sorry to interupt, but that is one of the best ideas for anything on the site in a very long time. Hope it catches on.
Tab is welcome to go first i still have my work schedule being tossed in the air
Oran,
Thanks for the compliment!
KrisWest,
That’s cool, we’ll get something scheduled out after the Debate between myself and Tab has concluded.
Tab,
Who posts first?
Gimme a good solid debate title, and I’ll give it a go - unless you have a burning desire to hurl yourself into the breech.
How about urban poverty?
One side of the debate: long term planning centers that specialize in goals for those who cannot “waste time” with the future thinking when immediate concerns and immediate short term pleasures, drug/alcohol demand everything of them.
Would you think about going college if you had to think more about the best way to get to the corner store for bread, without getting shot?
Okay so Pav says:
And I say:
Let’s cobble something together out of that.
I started a thread called “Inevitabilism Vs. Compatabilism” iz ziz okay…?
Sounds great to me!