A Debate about Debate

I thought I saw it stated -somewhere?- that the separate 'debate' section was created as a 'release valve' to allow other threads to carry out regular business and place discussions of opinions in their own area. This is different from most other boards I have been a part of, where debates occured in the subheading appropriate to their subject matter. The downside of this is that -unfortuantely- the people most drawn to a separate debate area are often the least qualified to contribute: the toxically over-opinionated, the downright rude, and the habitually argumentative. Whereas debates naturally occuring within a subject tend to be limited to those who 'frequent' that portion of the board, and so are far more likely to remain semi-friendly, on-topic, and die a natural death when the discussion has reached its terminus.

It would be an unfortunate reflection on this community if we can't restrain ourselves enough to have a mature discussion of a slightly controversial topic. How is it that we can take responsibility for large, expensive luxuries like our dolls, yet can't maintain a sensible, respectful discussion on subjects that are -let's face it- often hypothetical and having little or no impact in the 'real world'? It's like we really are a bunch of 'spoiled brats' who can't deal with a difference of opinion.

 

I disagree strongly. I personally really enjoy the debate forum. In much of the rest of DoA people just post back to the OP and go on their way--there is some in depth discussion, but not like there is in the debate section, and I really like seeing a topic explored in this kind of depth. Plus it's fun mental exercise--it's more of a challenge and requires more thought. This definitely is not General Discussion, and there are always limits to free speech. Every where we go in life we self regulate to some extent (for instance, I don't talk to my boss the same way I talk to my close friends), and DoA is no different. There is lots of room for people to express themselves, but they need to be able to do so in a mature way.

I also think it's wrong to get rid of a whole section just because a few people can't behave like adults. Why should everyone suffer because of the actions of a small minority? It seems more fair to boot out the trouble makers than to take the debate forum away from those who enjoy it.

I take this debate thread not as proof that DoA can't handle debate, but that the mods want to improve the section for everyone.

 

As a new member of DoA, I just want to add that the debate forum has been a perticularly interesting way for me to ponder the why's and wherefore's of my newfound hobby. I would be disappointed to see it go.

From what I've read (and I've been lurking for quite a while before getting up the nerve to post), most debates proceed quite politely, but a couple have gone off track. The question is why:

1. sensitive subject

'Why I like larger dolls' is a much safer topic than certain discussions about the more adult or mature nature of BJD collecting, especially when the topic touches upon people's sexual mores or personal experience

2. people's concept of the meaning of the word 'debate'

As someone mentioned before, 'debate' is frequently confused with 'argument.' Is debate on DoA to be a reflection of classic highschool or college debate team rules or is it something more informal? The mods may very well post guidelines or rules, but I don't know that there is any consensus of opinion about what a DoA debate actually IS. People have made some constructive suggestions previously in this thread, so maybe some changes could be made. What I observe here on DoA is people having polite discussions, and agreeing or disagreeing politely. Perhaps it's not a debate forum at all; perhaps it's more accurately a forum for discussions of the deeper issues of collecting resin replicas of the human figure and imbuing them with personalities according to our own personal fantasies and imaginations.

3. use of volatile language
Certain words carry emotional weight. We all know which words they are, but we use them without thinking when we are trying to express... well, emotion. The point is that those emotional words have their effect: they elicit responses from others, who then may fling out an emotion-laden word or two of their own. My concept of 'debate' is that people use emotion words very consciously to goad their opponents and destabilize their argument. I don't think that's the point here. It's more an exchange of ideas, right? What I saw in threads that got off track (and closed) was language that may have been intended as a stimulus to argue a point but was take as offensive. If I'm passionate or angry about a subject, my first draft tends to be too emotional - a quick edit of just those volatile words usually renders it much more diplomatic.

I hope I haven't been presumptuous in responding to such an important issue while still rather new at this. I'm having such a great time playing and creating with my first BJDs! The satisfaction runs rather deep; talking about it with others who share this interest - albeit in completely different ways - adds to the peasure. So I think it's really important for the comunity to come to some understanding of what a 'debate' really is.

 

My two cents after reading through the previously mentioned locked threads, as well as this one:

I agree that there are some threads that just can't be grounded in tangible evidence, such as those that are based around LE distribution, ownership preferences, "cheapness," company policy, and issues that aren't about the aesthetics of the dolls themselves. But threads that are reflective of human social constructions and how we represent them through dolls (realistic sculpts, body types, nudity, sexual orientation, gender, race, age, and religion, just to name a few) should be approached with caution because there are underlying sociological facts that can't be substituted with "well I think x is false/true, so it must be so."

Case in point - it's really a shame when threads get derailed or shut down because of people who make the most off-the-wall remarks about how paganism is "dead," how black people are inherently criminals, how dark skin is ugly, how homosexuals are diseased, how women who don't shave are gross, etc., or because of that ONE person who decides to make it all about their special snowflake selves, dismisses any empirical evidence as "bullshit," and starts unnecessary drama baiting. I would much prefer some over stricter enforcing on what constitutes a debate (ie. not just a happy opinion sharing circle, but being able to defend a set position with basic logic) over random outbursts of "I AM 1/4 <insert group>, MY ANCESTORS WONT ANYONE PLEASE THINK OF MY ANCESTORS." Because trust me, the latter has happened and it was not pretty. At all.

I also think dismissive comments such as "you're just looking for something to be offended by," "why the hell do you care so much," and "this is pointless" should be called out for OT-ness because they're not conducive to debate in any way. Just because it doesn't interest/affect you doesn't mean others can't have a sane conversation regarding the matter. I've been in my share of heated debates and played ball from the unpopular hardass side from time to time, but they were enjoyable for the most part. It was only when people got emotional over topics they didn't fully understand and made inflammatory statements that things got out of hand. I also agree with locking beaten-to-death threads and starting over fresh, as well as a system of warnings, temp bans, and permanent bans from the debate subforum for members who can't control themselves online. That's how it was on other debate-oriented boards I frequented - if you made personal attacks, spammy one-liners, had nothing to back up your arguments, or insisted on "my opinion is fact" crusades, it was usually three strikes for each category.

 

I always saw the "debate" forum as a place for people to have discussions that might get heated and involve controversial disagreements, which are strongly discouraged in all other areas of the forum. I have never seen it as a place to enforce classical "debate" rules. A lot of people who post on this board have never been on a debate team or been attorneys, and making them adhere to very formal "rules" such as point/ counterpoint, or "Resolved: male dolls should not wear skirts" type of formats, would just discourage people from expressing themselves, which is not what I personally want to see happen.

I agree that the topics end up being more like polite (hopefully) discussions about hot-button issues, but this board needs a place for that. It lets people blow off steam and it is also a useful guide to how people on the board actually think. You don't get much conception of a person's thought process from the umpty-fratteenth waiting room or Gallery thread or a bland general discussion about "how did you pick the name for your doll?" etc. I am frankly amazed and interested on a regular basis about what people consider important or what they think on certain topics, because these ideas would just never have occurred to me. Perhaps that works both ways and the other people would never have thought my way either. With a debate forum, we get exposure to both sides of thought.

 

i think when people start arguing and people start requesting for a thread to be locked, it should be locked. a few weeks ago, in the 'Incest with BJDs' thread, it was an all-out war and everyone was calling for it to be locked. it only got locked when someone said something disgustingly offensive and it offended a moderator. if it had been locked before, perhaps that wouldn't have happened.

 

Is there no middle ground?

I'm with bunnydots, here. While I get frustrated when threads in this section become boring (too many people just saying "yeah, I feel the same way" with no new nuances added) or angsty or offensive/offended, I also am largely disinterested in following any kind of formal debate style. Set position? No thanks...the only high school debate I was ever on, the teammates who chose me to speak because I'm all smart n shizz got really annoyed because I was constantly coming back at the other team with "oh, I totally see your point! I hadn't thought of that...but on the other hand, have you considered this?" That's the kind of "debate" I'd like to have, one where positions can be fluid, and where, while logic is certainly encouraged, it's not the major focus of the discussion so much as an underlying structural element. Besides, someone listed some of the types of discussion where logic and facts really don't apply--there's opinion, and there's exploration of people's attitudes and motives, but logic is never going to bring the community to a conclusion on whether or not companies ought to restock LE dolls--and really, those topics make up the vast majority of this section of the forum. Even the topics that do involve underlying sociological facts often come down to how a person interprets those facts and the interplay with the issue--so while I would LOVE to see more people linking or referencing evidence of the underlying facts, I think we're going to end up talking about what people are choosing to do with those facts rather than the facts themselves.


p.s.
If any of the people who commented that it would be nice to read careful English with proper capitalisation are still reading, I'd just like you to know that you have been part of tipping me (reluctantly) over into, sigh, being a "big girl" and using my "big letters." I thought about it when I became a real English teacher, but it was you guys who finalised the decision.

 

Now maybe I'm just a little grumpy today from dealing with College Admin, but I do think that "formal debate formatting" would not work in this section, simply because most of the discussion is about subjective matters... Really, it's a Serious Discussion section rather than a "Debate". However, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that if you're going to participate in the discussion, that you should at least meet a mininmum standard of decorum. Meaning that if you can't interact with other members in a reasonable, adult manner, you should not be surprised if there are consiquences. Moderator inforced or member applied. If you act like an idiot, you're going to be called one.

I do think that it would not be unreasonable for the Moderators to approve debate thread starters, so we don't get five threads about things that should really be in General Discussion or a Livejournal page, but then there are other sections like the Artists Subforum that also need approval, and that seems to be working. Also it would be an opportunity to have feedback in order to polish up the thread starter from a possibly spur-of-the-moment post to something that could provide some real discussion.

 

This has come up several times and I would like to state that although I, personally, was offended, my personal offense is not the reason that thread was locked. (I would like to think there was a sort of Universal Outrage about such misguided opinions/thoughts being spoken aloud in that thread.) That thread had definitely degenerated to a BAD place the last two or three pages and it was closed in the timliest time possible. Just because members are calling out for a lock, it doesn't necessarily follow that the thread should be locked.

 

I don't think "stricter enforcing on what constitutes a debate" is necessarily interchangeable with "formal debate style, so I fail to see how a middle ground can't exist. Most of my examples were about keeping inflammatory behaviour and imminent lock-down signs in check, not about changing the structure of forum debate altogether. In fact, I don't see how anything resembling a high school debate club could take place on such a large online venue.

I still maintain that it wouldn't be a debate if people were constantly opinion-dumping or flip-flopping back and forth for the sake of being agreeable; that sort of thing would belong in general discussion. The last time I checked, the main purpose of a debate was to support a given argument with convincing evidence (and I did acknowledge that some topics are far too subjective to have set positions to defend).

 

Bravo!

Feel free to "lol," twist, and mangle at will in private messages and so forth. I know I do, and take a wildly perverse pleasure in doing so.

On the primary point of the discussion, I agree that trying to enforce actual debate structure here wouldn't work. At a bare minimum it would require education of the user group as a whole -- and I think probably most of us have enough to do already.

But being open to other viewpoints and really thinking about them -- THAT's what makes a good discussion. I applaud the person above me who said that (I've lost track).

 

(snipped)

Sorry, I didn't mean to say that you'd advocated the formal debate style. I was objecting more specifically to the desire to have people "defend a set position with logic." Sure, "flip-flopping for the sake of being agreeable" isn't all that interesting...but my point is, I often don't have a "set" position, as I'm open to being influenced by other people--whether they win me right over to their side of the debate, or simply cause me to adjust my own position. And I think there are others like me, whose positions change throughout the discussion, whether through action of other members or just because of the passage of time.

 

Sometimes a thread shouldn't be locked just because people want it to. If all the people clamouring for a thread to be locked had just left it alone, perhaps the people serious about the debate could have got on with talking things over objectively? Just a thought.

Your (general 'you') first port of call in a debate is your own conscience. If you couldn't say what you have written to someone's face, perhaps you shouldn't be saying it to someone you barely know over the internet. I get that things become heated, my temper has overrun before too, no one is an angel, but if you count to ten before you post the response you will probably see a few things that could stand to be changed before you let your post out into the world where it could offend and turn a bad situation worse. We all like to win a debate, but sometimes it is far better to walk away than to hurt people's feelings just because you're angry and not thinking correctly.

Also, with regard to correct spelling and phrasing of sentences, I won't respond to some badly written posts. I don't want to be held responsible for misunderstanding someone else when they have neglected to write properly and legibly

 

so for those of you worried about proper spelling and punctuation, what about those members who have learning disabilities? or what about members that missed alot of school? due to whatever reason. having a serious illness that requires being hospitalized, being teased at school so much they dont participate, those children who where neglected and never forced to go to school. or even abusive parents keeping children home to hide bruises. the list goes on (and the state doesnt always do something about it. trust me on that)

so should they not be allowed in the debate? even though they might have a good point?


its one thing to ask that members try or make an effort but its another story when you say they need to.

and please dont say hurtful things like "well if they are 14+ they should have had plenty of time to learn it by now" because thats not always the case

 

I don't think anyone demands perfect spelling and grammar to participate in the discussion forum. If they did, I know I would have been driven out with flaming touches a long time ago The problem seldom is those who are weak in grammar, but those who just can't be bothered to spell correctly, who write chatspeak and don't care enough to use periods, commas or capital letters.

 

I agree it's not really a thing about people might have problems as it is some people need to stop being lazy.
There's a huge difference in:
1. I like this but i dont know wat to do about it.
and
2.i liek dis bt i dont know wut 2 do about its

 

A lot of people -myself included- have learning disabilities and still manage to post with (mostly) correct punctuation, spelling, and grammar (just don't ask me to tell left from right without looking at my hands); it's like how virtually everyone understands posting in 'all caps' is considered shouting and not appropriate. It is a part of written communication and you are free to post any way you like, but you must understand that how you draft posts affects how your message is received as much as its content. It's the same as how expression, tone of voice, and diction effects how what you say in a conversation is perceived, as well.

...suddenly I am reminded of a particularly heated debate on another forum. Instead of shutting down debate or deleting posts, forum mods opened the floor for any comment posters would like to make...
so long as it was posted in the form of a haiku.

The results were...quite amazing; ran the gamut from hilarious to pithy to beautifully eloquent. It kept the debate sane and made it downright creative and fun, too.

 

It's rather undeniable that a well-phrased, properly punctuated sentence will make more of an impact than one that neglects capitilization and spelling, regardless of the point being made. And in a section of the forum where one would expect a more..hmm, elevated (?) level of discussion, more care should be given to the whole presentation of a post.

In Debate, we (the mods) were aiming for a different sort of discussion. Not just the topics, which could be more complex and potentially controversial, but also in the style of that discussion. We want Debate to not be a meme area, where members simply answer the numbered questions and walk away, but where they could become involved and the conversation could grow and evolve and mature. To this aim, we expect that a member should take the time and consider not only what they're saying, but how it's being said, does it make the impact and point without being purely inflammatory, is the grammar as clear as possible to make sure that that's the idea being put forth, etc.

We wouldn't want to exclude anyone from the Debate area, but it doesn't seem like a negative thing to me to have higher expectations than one would reading "What type of candy is your doll?"-type threads.