Why Is This Section Inactive?

I insist that you make opening deliberations. :sunglasses:

It’s always more fun that way.

Hmmm… I can go first, but since I’m arguing the negative I don’t think that makes as much sense. You’re the one making an assertion (humans are livestock), anything I write by way of intro will just be a response to that rather poorly-defined claim. You could (and will probably need to) come back and say, “no no no, that’s nothing like what I mean, actually I mean this” and then my entire intro post is just wasted.

So, if I go first, I’d want to do the format where I have a shorter intro and conclusion post, so:

  1. me (100-150 words)
  2. you (200-300 words)
  3. me (200-300 words)
  4. you (200-300 words)
  5. me (200-300 words)
  6. you (200-300 words)
  7. me (100-150 words)

I can accept this, though I’d still prefer you to go first. What say you?

Also, any nominations for moderator? It may be hard to find someone who is both impartial and willing to read through our 1200-1800 words.

I’m a prolific slacker. I insist you go first. You seem to be acquainted with some of my past writings by the sounds of it anyways with the subject you’ve chosen to debate me with.

The criteria seems well enough.

I had a hunch you were a prolific slacker, and in fact the design of this challenge, as well as the topic, were really just a suggestion I gave you not too long ago turned into a debate.

Anyway, we need a judge and/or MC. I propose Uccisore.

j/k. Mr. Reasonable, any interest?

I propose Gib or WWIII.

I will be honored to judge the debate impartially.

Excellent.

To confirm, here’s the outline as I understand it:
Claim: “Humans are livestock”
Arguing in favor: HaHaHa
Opposing: Carleas

Format: 7 posts total, three from Hahaha and four from Carleas, as follows:
Post #1) Carleas (100-150 words)
Post #2) Hahaha (200-300 words)
Post #3) Carleas (200-300 words)
Post #4) Hahaha (200-300 words)
Post #5) Carleas (200-300 words)
Post #6) Hahaha (200-300 words)
Post #7) Carleas (100-150 words)

Participants will have 3 days for their posts measured from whenever their opponent last posted, except the 1st and 7th posts for which Carleas will have 1 day.

No images are to be used in the debate.

Honorable and Impartial Judge: WW_III_ANGRY

If that’s all right, I’ll start the threads after I get confirmation and post my first post 1 day later (since I’m only writing a half-post).

Sounds good.

I second that, but I guess WW_III beat me to it.

I will gladly sit on the sidelines, however, and make rude comments as I see fit.

I welcome your commentary Gib.

Carleas, it should be known in our conversation that I don’t classify all human beings as livestock but instead just a majority only.

Those that are not livestock are either farmers or plantation owners. Keep this in mind during your constructed openings.

Of course all of this is metaphors dealing with the human hierarchy itself.

Alrighty rock and roll.

OK, it’s on. I’ll post my intro by roughly 9am tomorrow.

Debate
Discussion

I have a dentist appt today might be out most of the day, fyi

No worries, your judge duties don’t kick in until the end of the debate, so you’ve got plenty of time to recover from the dentist.

How can this be fair; when Carleas gets the first word and the last?

Precisely. :sunglasses:

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=190079

In my defense I’ll note that I suggested HaHaHa take firsts and lasts, so I wasn’t trying to pull a fast one on anybody.

And I actually do think this is fair in principle, though in practice it didn’t feel that way. If the posts were longer, and the opening and closing were a little less than half the length of a normal post (more like a third), I think it would be fair. Just need to turn some dials to find the sweet spot.

So, a rematch then?