Debate Etiquette!

I debate like a blowhard, I'll go on and on because I'm just so fueled by passion about whatever issue it is

People should read up on and make sure to avoid logical fallacies. Also any posts saying something like "Get over it," "This argument is over," or "You're beating a dead horse," should be deleted and the person warned. Not a formal warning but a note that let's them know that isn't how you debate.

 

I'd disagree about the dear horse comment if they can give a reason why that particular point is no longer relevant.
Example:
Person 1: "[Statement of misinformed fact]!"
Person 2: "Well, we had already discussed that and it was proven that...."

However, that just strengthens the point about reading the thread. Or, if the thread is rediculously long, to read the first few and last 10 pages.

 

I think in any debate the second you start attacking a person rather than their point of view is when it's time to concede defeat.

 

I try and follow some simple guidelines when entering into online debate/communication:

- Before posting, read what you've written at least twice over.
- If something really hits a nerve, step away from the computer, make a cup of tea/coffee/hot choccy/your preferred beverage and calm down before replying.
- Don't generalise. If your sentence starts "Most people..." or some variation, then delete it and rephrase.
- Don't assume you know the habits, lifestyle, or feelings of the other person.
- If your point has already been made by ten different people, you don't need to jump in and restate it yet again. (I'm definitely guilty of doing this! )
- Admit when you're wrong, and apologise sincerely if you go over the top.
- If you get into an off-topic loop with another member, take it to PM and don't detract from the main theme.
- Be nice. An obvious one, but when your language is pleasant, it's often more persuasive. Putting someone's back up is not going to make them want to listen to your argument. Even if you disagree completely and utterly with the other person's point of view, be nice.

 

*ack* sorry, doublepost fever.

 

Debating Style:

I'm a questioner! I like to play Devil's Advocate, and suggest an alternative question/reason for just about any point that comes up. (Most of the time, I don't even have to agree with one side or the other.)

When I do have an opinion, I prefer to state my view outright, & then tie it in to what others have already said.

Agree to Disagree. I don't care if there's any real resolution.

Talker. Much too verbose, but I'll try to work on my brevity problem.


Acceptable in a "clean" debate:

-Read the whole thread first, & don't repeat points that've been drummed home... but do speak up with a new viewpoint on something that's already passed 10 pages ago. If you have a strong opinion, you should still be allowed to weigh in with it.

-Qualify your generalizations... but I don't think generalizing is an absolute evil. If you must blanket something, defuse it with things like "as far as I know" or "in my experience". People always find an exception to your absolute, so expect them.

-Tone matters! Use "I-statements", like they teach you in couples therapy. This avoids putting people on the defensive.
No: "What's up with all the goth dolls here?" = Tone demands an explanation.
Yes: "I see a lot of dolls who have goth styles or modifications. Is there something specific about ABJD-hobby that seems to attract the goth subculture? = Tone invites discussion.

-If someone has made a really good point, even if it's on the opposing side, I like to credit them for it! Letting people know when they've hit the heart of an issue (or at least a major artery), that's part of fostering a really good meaty debate.

PS. Usagi: Thanks very much for the link to Logical Fallacies. Folks who aren't up for a course in Rhetoric may skip this. But it's great reading for those who love a real debate.

And just because I can't resist...

"You vacuous toffee-nosed malodorous pervert!"
"Look! I came here for an Argument!"
"Oh! I'm sorry, this is Abuse.... you want Room 12A, next door."​

 

I didnt attend a school or area where there were debating teams so I dont know much about formal debating. So I did what I do when I dont know something, I go research.

I found this very nice link with some rules and advice for debating. They are clear and well put together so I thought I'd link them here (yes they refer to debating in American English because they were put together by an English Teacher, but I still think the premis applies)

http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-English/debate-advice.html
http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-English/debate-rules.html
http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-English/debate-suggestions.html

 

MY debate style can be wordy, but I can beat a topic to death too. I love to debate and as long as everyone behaves like adults (or almost-adults) then this should be pretty much acceptable.

 

My 'debate style', when I actually do post in debate threads, which is rare, is usually to try to open up people's worldviews with my often rather unique opinons, then sit back with popcorn unless someone makes a point to directly reply to me.

As for what belongs in a debate, I'd say anything goes barring personal attacks and netspeak.

 

I'm not sure what my debate style would be really. I always stress that what I'm saying is only my personal opinion and I always try my best to back up what I'm saying with things such as links or articles that others can access to see where my point of view might be coming from.

I think some things to keep in mind when engaging in a debate is:
Don't attack one another personally.
Keep your language clean.
Be able to put your money where your mouth is.
Be prepared that other people's opinions will probably differ from yours.
Accept that other people's opinions may differ from yours.
Be as clear and concise as possible without being condecending.

That's all I can think of for the moment. ^_^

 

I'd like to suggest that Politics, Religion and anything related to it be excluded from the debate posts.

 

That's a hard rule to enforce when you talk about a worldwide community. The dolls are from a culture who views them differently than the rest of the world in general. Topics can easily branch into fuzzy areas of politics and religion in approaching these views and how we relate to them, as well as the motivations of the companies.

 

Why? I'm curious.
While I don't think they will be relevant in all threads, there could easily be a discussion about how your religion affects your collecting dolls, or the politics of importing these dolls into the US.

 

because both can in effect start wars...and neither are very good for backing up your opinion (as they are opinions themselves and not facts)

 

They might start wars, but generally I don't think you need to worry about that on a doll forum. As VinylFaerie said this is a worldwide community. And I would think that using your experiences a perfect way to back up an opinion.

 

What is your debate style?

I debate with an open mind. If I have true feelings for something, I will avoid the topic, as I do not wish to ruin my credibility defending a position that may or may not be valid.

I try to find facts as well that are relevant. If someone brings up, for example, a rise in certain mods and certain real world event, I will do a few quick searches and see if it is a true rise or just a perceived rise. Often, I will also find outside sources (Gallup Polls, etc.) to back up positions of the masses' changing stances.

I respect both sides and will admit that there are points on both sides of the argument. I try to find the middle ground, where both sides are understood and clearer understanding occurs.

I tend to avoid emotion, unless emotion is relevant. Facts are better.

However, I do try to understand before being understood, and I do remember a quote I've heard some time ago: What people are not reasoned into they cannot be reasoned out of. When I come to understand that their stance is from emotion, I will concede specific areas and then usually stop.

I personally believe that debate exists to understand more than it exists to convince other people.

I also play devil's advocate when I find that I do not know enough to make my form of reasoned arguements. I will ask for the facts, ask questions that make both sides go "...Uh?", and try to make people start thinking.

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?

A clean debate uses specific, revelant examples. That is, it does not bring up moot point. For this, I would bring up that in Dollzone discussions of newer models, Lynn is not brought up. It leads to severe polarization and groupthink, and nothing is accomplished because of that.

Good language skills are a must. I understand that grammar, etc. may not be perfect, but the message must be clear.

I find it distasteful to spend my time reading a post that, at then end, says "I'm not sure what I was trying to say..." If you are not sure, go back and edit. There is never any pressing need to answer at that specific moment in time. Often, it is better to sit and think.

Personal attacks, foul language, and other such aggravating measures are not to be used at all.

Unsubstantiated claims, such as "Company A sells the most dolls" or "the rise in crimes leads to the rise in mods" are not really acceptable, as those are their own debates.

 

I don't have a particularly style, but I can think of some very big dos and don'ts.

Read the WHOLE thread before jumping into the thread. It happens way too often that people jump into threads and ask questions/make points/act indignant about things that have been covered again and again pages ago.

Don't dismiss the arguments being discussed. It drives me batty when people go, "I don't understand why this is such a big deal", "I don't understand why this is even being discussed." You may not, but obviously others do.

 

I'm not sure I have much style...unless you can call bluntness a 'style'. However, I'd like to mention an unacceptable behavior in debate that I haven't seen mentioned here yet is passive aggressiveness. If one has to resort to PA behavior one has lost the debate, IMO.

It's been said here already in different ways but it bears repeating... Clean, honest debate requires maturity, self-confidence and an open mind. If one feels one is being attacked personally or feels one needs to personally attack another to make a point that person has failed these important requirements.

Debates are about topics, not the debaters themselves.

 

What is your debate style?

I usually dislike having to defend my standpoint on this forum because there are so many people who will disregard fact for personal opinion. So I usually don't speak up unless I really feel strongly... and I usually have at least some facts to back it up... but...
I can be a hot-head and I know it. There are certain things that I see that evoke some reaction in me immediately, and although I can generally use good sense and avoid replying... obviously this is not always so.
Unfortunately, I also internally know when I'm flying off the handle in an unjust manner, and do, in the end, try my best to apologize and let the person who fell victim to my ignorant wrath know that I do see it from both sides.
Again, and unfairly, most of the time when I fly off the handle about something, it has nothing to do with the actual topic, and has everything to do with venting frustrations from outside sources.
I have no doubt that people think less of me for my handling of certain situations. But I try my best to make things right, or come to some agreeable stance on the issue.
None of it is fair, I know, but I'm being honest about some of my less than spectacular debate skills.

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?
I agree with Miss Sha, "Don't dismiss the arguments being discussed. It drives me batty when people go, "I don't understand why this is such a big deal", "I don't understand why this is even being discussed." You may not, but obviously others do."
It also drives me nuts when people use blanket statements such as "Oh, well, such and such a company would *never* do wrong, so you're obviously mistaken"... that has nothing to do with fact. Everyone slips up every now and again. That's life.
Statements pertaining to "Oh, can't we all just get along? *happysunshinepuppyflower*" also drive me batty. They have nothing to do with a debate. Just because you are arguing your point *DOESN'T* mean you have massive amounts of hatred towards who you're disagreeing with.