| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 101167 | 2009-07-03 22:42:00 | DEBATE: Commentary/Discussion on the Inaugural PressF1 Great Debate | somebody (208) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 788671 | 2009-07-20 08:02:00 | ^ x2 - agree completely :D. Stop being honest:p |
Blam (54) | ||
| 788672 | 2009-07-20 08:28:00 | I didnt vote because of Erayd, as fantastic as he or she may be, i didnt even really bother to pay attention to who was on which team. I was already for the idea of boot camps and I think that the affirmative team gave us good enough reason to give it a shot rather than not |
hueybot3000 (3646) | ||
| 788673 | 2009-07-20 08:43:00 | Guys.... are you voting objectively? I have to admit I'm stunned at the results so far, I thought the negative team did a much better job than the votes would indicate! I disagree that such comments are allowed to be posted. It will make the general public (i.e. the voting audience) think twice about the quality of the debate that negative team has presented before casting their votes because a member from the affirmative team suggested inferiority within his own team. On top of that, such comment may inadvertently introduce sympathy votes from some of the PF1 members. My 2 cents :) |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 788674 | 2009-07-20 08:52:00 | I disagree that such comments are allowed to be posted. It will make the general public (i.e. the voting audience) think twice about the quality of the debate that negative team has presented before casting their votes because a member from the affirmative team suggested inferiority within his own team. On top of that, such comment may inadvertently introduce sympathy votes from some of the PF1 members. My 2 cents :) Well this was intended to be a discussion/commentary thread - so people could discuss the debate, including who they thought should win. |
somebody (208) | ||
| 788675 | 2009-07-20 08:58:00 | I thought the debate was won by the affirmative team, interestingly. That had nothing to with the fact that Erayd was on the team, though his post did of course contribute significantly to me thinking the affirmative team won. They: - Clearly pointed out why boot camps were needed - Clearly pointed out why they would work That was enough for me, because I don't believe the negative team effectively knocked down either argument. Examples of success of them would have been good though, of course, but I expect they probably tried and failed to find any. As an aside, I have no idea whether I actually think they should be introduced, leaning on the 'not' side. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 788676 | 2009-07-20 12:22:00 | Personally I shall stay out of this until the votes are counted at the end of the period allowed. I may, or may not, comment after the votes are counted. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 788677 | 2009-07-25 05:58:00 | The voters have spoken . Congratulations to the affirmative team (Erayd, blam6, and wratterus), and thanks to everyone who took part and made it a success . How much interest is there for a second debate? New topic, new structure: I propose teams of 2, with shorter turnaround times, and teams have the ability to choose topics and sides (within certain guidelines) - and if there is enough interest, several debates running in parallel . Anybody keen? |
somebody (208) | ||
| 788678 | 2009-07-25 06:03:00 | Maybe organise backup members for teams this time around? Ooo I wonder if Sweep is going to comment |
hueybot3000 (3646) | ||
| 788679 | 2009-07-25 06:04:00 | I'm game for another one... :D | Erayd (23) | ||
| 788680 | 2009-07-25 06:22:00 | Congratulations to the affirmative team on the win. I don't mind being a part of another debate by the way. Also thanks to Somebody for keeping things under control and rule definitions. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | |||||