Debate Etiquette!

The only exception to that line is if someone really didn't understand why xyz was important, which is a subtle way of reminding everyone that we really are a global comminuty with some very different cultures.
But, to use that line as a way of dismissing an argument is very annoying.

 

1.) Personal Attacks
2.) Name-Calling (immature, but I've had it happen to me on these forums before o.o! In public no less).

 

My personal debating style generally involves stating what I think followed by why I think it, so I do think we should be able to reference dolls, photos, and posts that have been made public, so long as you are polite. I do think however that you can point something out as something you dislike politely. If, for example, you were arguing against the sexualization of mini dolls and wanted to illustrate what you thought the difference between outfits for minis that might be read as sexy verses outfits that were overtly meant to be sexual, finding pictures that you felt illustrated the difference would not be inappropriate in my view, so long as you didn't lash out against the people who posted them.

Also if a thread has reached a massive page count I don't think you should have to read the whole thing, but you should at least read the first few pages, skim the middle a bit and then read the last few pages, so you generally know the direction the debate has headed in.

Also, while I think you should not shy away from stating your opinions just because they are controversial or potentially offensive, you should always try to state your thoughts in the least inflammatory way possible. It's one thing to say, "I object to homosexuality because, based on my religious views, I find it to be immoral," and quite another to say, "I think gay people are sinners and will go to hell." While both are statements the second is much more accusatory in tone.

Lastly, don't ridicule someone for changing their stance, or be afraid to change your own. If someone provides an insightful argument for something that causes you to change the way you think about a topic, this doesn't mean that you are a weak minded person with no convictions. It means you are an open minded person with a willingness to change your world view based on new information provided to you. I'm not saying you should change your mind about any given topic, but if you do, you shouldn't feel ashamed for doing so, nor should anyone make you feel you should be.

 

I think we all understand that the most important part of a debate is to listen to what other people are saying. There are so many threads in General Discussion - and I realise this is an entirely different kettle of fish - which are just one great big long thread of personal answers.

Now, while this is totally acceptable when the question is something in the vein of "If you had a million dollars what doll(s) would you buy..."; it happens in a lot of slightly more serious and 'involved' topics, and can be very frustrating for participants who have been tracking the thread and reading the debate as it progresses.

Only reading the first post and making a reply to answer the first question can not only be detrimental to the current section of debate being explored, but also taking a little time to read the thread may help to broaden the poster's understanding of the topic and either answer any questions they may have, or even strengthen their argument for or against a certain school of thought.

This is something I'm seeing happen a lot in this thread - and this is a good example of when such behaviours are acceptable.

I have no debating style - in fact, I'm dreadful at debating, but I do have opinions which I certainly enjoy comparing to those of others! I don't like to call people out individually, and often refer to things using inclusive pronouns. Let's keep it clean and polite, everybody!

 

Seconding this, but again I have to butt inn with the cultural differences. Sometimes in debates, something is a hot button with, let's say Americans while it's simply not a problem here. Of cause it should be explained better than just stating that you don't "see what the big deal is", but sometimes people really don't understand why something is a problem.

I know this is the case with me when it comes to a lot of American issues.

 

I'm not exactly sure how to define my debate style. Obviously I'd like to ask questions, about the side I'm not in favor of, and try to understand why they feel the way they do. I'd also like to be able to express my own stance, in an understandable manner, and feel that I'm being heard, whether or not I'm agreed with.

In a clean debate I think, that you should only assume the facts in evidence. Bias should really not be a part of a debate, and by that I mean, if you know that debater A happens to be in favor of one side of the debate, but is arguing for the other side, I would examine all the posts in that thread, and not drag old, possibly outdated posts from other threads into it. I might not understand why they have changed sides, but I'm not going to start a fight, or call them a hypocrite, and I would expect the same respect from other members.

 

I would say I have a more passive debate style as in I don’t think that it needs to be any more than a general conversation about a topic. The problem with what a lot of people consider debate is that it turns into an argument. In debates I’ve had in real life it seems to become my ideas against your ideas without any real consideration from one person to another, that is to say that instead of a sharing of different ideas it becomes more like a stand off between people.

So I guess as far as what a good or clean debate is I would say people presenting facts, then also representing their opinion or inclination, and then site actual reasons for their thoughts without making it any sort of personal attack on anyone. I think a good way to help stay off other peoples toes when it comes to topics that may be personal to others would be to simply keep any sort of negative assumptions about doll collectors (individual or specific group) out of threads as much as possible and focus on the specific topics.

 

I agree with PSYENCE (sorry haven't figured out how to work all the stuff in this forum yet) regarding to Listen to what people are saying! I think this is the biggest issue - miscommunication.

My experience is most people do not debate (take a stand on an issue and present their arguement in a factual manner). They mostly want to state their personal opinion and how they feel about something.

Both are fine - but just know the difference.

Debating styles vary and that is something that should be kept in the front of your thoughts while posting.

If photos/pictures would help to make a point - people should either use their own photos or get specific permission to use someone elses photos/pictures before using them as an example.

I always try to think about how I would feel about receiving the post I'm getting ready to send. Would it offend me? Does it sound neutral enough? Am I being passionate about my opinion, but not to the point of agression?

Just some more thoughts....

 

The only thing I would add is don't use too much compu-speak, XD! Also try your hardest to spell correctly, assuming English is your native tounge. If not I forgive you.

 

Hrm. That is a salient question. It's true that religion, politics, & sex (the Big Three You Don't Discuss At the Dinner Table) can cause a debate to flare quickly into an argument or a war, being the hot-buttons they are. But it's also true that they all have some valid place in ABJD-hobby, which is so personally & culturally influenced.

Maybe the mods could address these things "officially", in some kind of debate policy or guideline, before we even start? If we know where the line is, it may be easier to stick to.

 

I debate only when I can hold a coherent sentance, which isn't often. I'm also a stickler for logical arguments, and since calling people on logical fallacies is pedantic and annoying (And has a tendancy to completely ruin what they were trying to say) I try to avoid it ^.^ That said... a logical argument is very important. I think it's both direspectful and pointless to state facts without sources and evidence, to make general comments based on single point/sentances/items, and to present opinions as facts.

Also, I have a tendancy to invoke Godric's Law. But that's unlikely to come up here, so it's pretty much moot XD

 

What is your debate style?
My internet debate style is somewhat abbreviated from off-internet ^^ but I'd say full-coverage? On message boards I generally go through a whole thread and start my response right in the beginning in a separate text file. I modify it based on what people have said throughout the thread, so it's all fresh in my mind (if there are questions or new points I try to address them, if some point's been parroted too many times I take it out or present it differently, etc.), and end up with an all-inclusive post of my own at the end. I check it over for coherency, try to forsee some of the reactions to it and address those, and then post. I try to make clear when what I'm saying is opinion or when it is backed by real evidence or examples (not analogies, stereotypes, projections, what I assume other people think, and the like). I also try to make clear when I'm just clarifying my point (say, with an example) as opposed to really backing it, and avoid inaccuracy and inefficiency if I can, and things like assuming anyone who doesn't agree with me just doesn't understand what I was trying to say (any expression of "I'm coming into this absolutely right and am not planning to entertain any alternatives." ) I also try to keep from getting too offended by people's opinions, and unless they're persistently causing problems or there's some other big exception, I don't let people's behavior in debate threads affect what i think of them outside the thread. I go into a debate to learn and to have fun as well as assert my point.

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?
I find pigeonholing write-offs and personal attacks unacceptable in debates. Saying everyone who has a certain opinion is stupid or doesn't understand logic, etc. is unhelpful and inaccurate (and auto-asserts that the speaker is by contrast smart or does understand logic, which of course may or may not be true. Either way, it doesn't contribute anything to the discussion). Subtle snark also projects a sort of 'I'm the one laughing at you, therefore I'm right/smarter/better/more mature' vibe, so it's also potentially inaccurate and just unnecessary. I can't think of any point that cannot be made clear without it (making things clear to certain people is a whole nother story).

On the other hand, it's also annoying when people go nuts over things not intended to insult anyone, and go around trying to make everyone conform to too rigid a PC standard ("I'm extremely insulted that you could even mention that people might not like x company's policy! I'm so getting this thread closed!")
Terrible grammar and spelling not only makes people's posts hard to understand and potentially misleading, it invites judgments on a person's character and intelligence and makes it harder for some to resist snark, so I think it's a good idea to just cut it out, to the best of one's ability, for everyone's sake.

I don't think I like the idea of restricting certain subjects from any mention, unless they're already against the forum rules (in which case that's that). Seems overly preemptive. But I suppose it depends on the subject and scope.

 

What is your debate style? I usually state my opinions quite bluntly, yet try my best to keep my posts well-mannered and as non-offensive as possible. I am aware of the fact that when stating my opinion regarding subjects I feel strongly about, I have a tendency to get a bit carried away and heated, but I try to keep it to simple rambling and not say anything too harsh or offensive. I do find it problematic, at times, to state my real opinion without offending *anyone*. It just seems like there's always *someone* who might get offended by your opinion regarding certain subjects (especially personal ones), but I try my best.
i tend to be much softer-spoken and more diplomatic on the internet than in rl- in reality in might even be very harsh, offensive and vulgar at time. But considering that online I can't see exactly who I'm facing and screen whether or not it'd be okay to express myself that way- I try to be softer and more well mannered, knowing that young or touch people might end up reading my post, and not only the person or two I originally destined my post for.

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?
I think that personal attacks, racism and intolerant expressions should be totally unacceptable. I think it should be a given. The freedom of speech is important, but to some extent. For example: in another community I used to be a member of (non-BJD related) someone used to post pics of her artworks which contained the swastika motif (very bluntly in the Holocaust- related context) in a way that wasn't obvious enough whether or not she was for or against the idea of Nazism. Me and other Jews around that community felt very uncomfortable and even offended by this, but the mods there refused to take those posts off "in the name of freedom of speech". Personally, I think that's awful. If I were to see a BJd dressed as a Nazi soldier/KKK member/whatever, I'd be very offended. I think that despite the freedom of speech, this kind of things should be condemned, especially in communities which contain younger members and content which is supposed to be rated PG. I think that no one is supposed to feel uncomfortable, offended or hated around the community, even if that means bending the "freedom of speech" principal a bit. And especially when that person feels that way simply for being who they are or being born to a certain religion/country/etc., and doing nothing wrong.

What I consider "clean debate" would be a debate free of foul language, personal attacks etc. I think that people can almost always find a way to convey their message without attaching others, offending or badmouthing. Personally, I find the excuse "that's the way I am and that's how I express myself" to be a very poor one. if you don't know how to speak your mind without causing riot- you should be the one to adjust yourself to others' feeling, and not the other way around.

 

My debating style I guess I'd say is give and take. I like to input as much as I can and I try to get info from waht others are saying. A good debate is one where I've learned something new.

You must go into a debate with an open mind, it's openly recently I've realised this. If you are not prepared to have your mind changed, don't enter the debate forums. If you do have room for give and take, and you will change your mind and others, I look forward to discussing issues with you!

To debate one must realise the point is not to get everyone to agree. It's to explore opinions. We are not debating laws going ahead, just how we feel on doll issues.

It is unacceptable, as everyone has said, to get personal, or to use personal things to try and undermine people.

It is unacceptable to stereotype and call people names based on having seen people call them that name. If you can't distinguish your own opinon from others, you won't be able to get the most out of the debating forum, and you might cause some issues.

Above all lets read it all carefully. Skim reading each others posts and attempting to reply won't lead to good things!

 

I cannot agree enough with the use of proper grammar, or at least the attempt of it. It's actually easier for me to understand the writing of someone who's not 100% with the language than a native speaker who types in one long babble, without caps or punctuation.
Also, since this is a worldwide forum, don't expect everyone to understand the references you are making. Don't expect someone from the same country/state/city to understand them. Be clear, and don't take it as an insult if someone asks you to explain something.
And one pet peve: For the love of Mike, if you're gonna quote something, don't quote a whole 5 paragraph post, unless you're refering to the whole thing. Paring it down to just the part you're refering to helps avoid confusion and keeps the discussion going at a smooth pace. If you want to bring attention to multiple points, then make multiple quotes. Ok, ranting over...

 

Should there maybe be some kind of three-strikes rule for problem debaters? For example, people that continually get too heated in arguments, or never read the thread before posting their responses? When they don't follow the etiquette rules, they get banned or suspended from the debate forum?

It might avoid the issue of, "Oh, so and so's in the thread, it's all going to hell now."

 

What is your debate style?
I use facts that I have obtained from reliable sources, like the Christian Scientist and NPR. I do not randomly shout "It's because I said so!". I tend to defend myself if someone directly opposes me and my views, and I can continue this bickering in such a style for a long while. (Though if anyone else wants to see what I debate like go to the Evil Empire, I'm a gatekeeper in the Human World.)

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?
For a "clean" debate I think cursing is just not needed. Honestly, if you have to express something strongly use a bigger or stronger word. A curse word make it seem like a child's rant to me. (Trust me I should know, I used to do it.) Also pure flaming of anything without reasoning. If you have a reason to believe something and it makes logical sense, word it in a way that isn't rude like "Your doll sucks because it's yellow!" it gets everyone no where fast. Treating everyone else like they're inferior to you or dumber because their opinion isn't the same, and jumping on people who's opinions are different (if they have a reason), but if they merely state their opinion I think it's "clean" to be allowed to ask why they think that.

Though here some other things that I find rather annoying while trying to read a debate:
1) One line posts that merely state you agree. Great tell me why you agree, then it won't be random spam that slows down people from trying to get to the point.
2) Putting "Ignore that last paragraph" under a paragraph. It serves no point because if you wanted someone to ignore it, delete it! If you're trying to get by because your post is touchy then either stick with it or reword it.
3) Putting random things like "Because I say so". I know that can easily fall into one liner but some people just don't get it! We are all adults here (or mentally I hope) and well, no one should be treating anyone else like a child.

I can go on and on about what annoys me with debates but if I've learned anything from Mrs. Holland (and her teaching us Model UN stuff) is that killing them with kindness is the best thing you can do, and it keeps it clean.

 

At the end of the list of rules in the Rules sticky, it says:

So yes, this was our thinking too. It's also worth mentioning that if a member loses access to the Debate sub-forum, it won't affect their access to the rest of DoA.

 

What is your debate style?

I try very hard to be polite and I reread my reply twice to make sure I haven't over-generalized or offended anyone. I usually try to keep an open mind and rather like it when something is said that makes me reconsider my position and opinion. However, I will sink my teeth in on a point if I believe it needs to be debated and I can get frighteningly long-winded. Thank goodness I'm also learning to 'agree to disagree' these days.

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

I think covering what I think is unacceptable is much easier.

1. Stating experience and opinions like it is a fact. Experience can be used as examples, but something that happens once or twice to a person does not make a fact.

2. One line answers to state an opinion or leave a cryptic response. I find this pointless in a debate. If a person has nothing to add, I would say don't comment.

3. The usual "I'm in this dollie hobby for the happy and all this debate is just too serious for the hobby!" I understand that not everyone likes debating, but neither is anyone being forced to read the debate. Don't come into a debate to tell us that debating is killing The Happy of the hobby. It's not that way for everyone.

As an extra...What I hope people can remember:

1. If you find yourself steaming from the head, back off and come back again later. When a person is overemotional, it's really hard to debate objectively and things can get nasty.

2. A contrary opinion from yours is not a personal offense. I realize that a lot of people get offended if someone contradicts them or offers a differing opinion. A debate will always have different sides and no one is hopping over to the other side of the fence just to offend someone else. I wish people would remember this one.

I think I better stop here... >_> I'm falling victim to over long comments again.