Debate Etiquette!

Nice Question!

I think that gettiing personal, getting emotional over something philisophical, all caps tyrades, and ganging up on the minority opinion are all poor form.

My style? Well... I like debate so I never get all emotionally involved, you know? Which ticks a good lot of people off for some reason. Perhaps I come off as sarcastic because I dont use emoticons. Who knows.

 

I have found recently that there a few members who constantly gang up on or single out people who have opinions different from their own.
Instead of trying to understand that everyone has their own experiences and opinions and expressing politely why theirs are different, they instead get upset and list numerous reasons why the person is wrong (usually in a very personal way).

They don't state their opinions, they tear others apart. I think this is beyond rude.

I also do not think it is very polite when people bold or type certain words or phrases in different colors. I think that is kinda rude too....people will read the post, they don't need things in bold and color coded in order to understand what the person is saying.

 

I'm not sure if this is the place to post this; but will there be any new debate threads soon? The current two have been up for more than two weeks, and I've spoken my peace there and would really like more debate.

If the problem is due to waiting for those who suggested a particular topic to get back to the mods, perhaps we could make a 'rule' about that so as to keep the new topics coming?

 

I second this. As the Scalping thread went on, it not only got repetitive but it began to get really rude. Surely a couple of weeks is long enough for everyone to have a say?

 

My debate style when I'm not a target is.....to stick to the facts and avoid "choosing" a side. I suppose most people wouldn’t think too kindly of that but debates are often over the gray areas of acceptable behavior and I can usually see the merits of both arguments.

 

When I go into a debate I appreciate people who are articulate and refrain from personal attacks on others. I try to reciprocate and debate as I like to see others debate.
I do, however, have a bad habit of playing devil's advocate. I think it comes from growing up in a place where everybody was too busy trying to please those en vogue to sit down and hash out interesting topics. They required a lot of "what if" and "Not that I agree, but..." prodding.
This tends to get people in arms a bit, but makes for a very lively conversation. However, it makes me sad when one or both sides begins to get frustrated and snippy. It's only fun until people start getting tired of defending their position and working with an unyielding opposition.

People who attack others, name call, or give on line answers don't really fuel debate for me personally. They just make me frown and think, "Oh my... they're everywhere. Is there no escape?"

Conversely, people who dismiss debate as a waste of time or too serious for whatever the subject is, don't further the argument either. Regardless of the topic, if there's quotes to quote, stories to tell, and opinions to have- there is am open debate. If it isn't important enough or too serious to discuss, there's nobody making them post to it.

 

I am not certain what my debate style is. I try to explain my side of things is the most accurate way I can. I like to use a compination of examples and logic. though I will say that myemotion does come into play. I am dislexic so I have trouble with spelling and getting what I mean across is a clear manner.

As to what I find aceptable in a "Clean" debate I agree that respect is very important. And though I try to make myself understood I do not agree with Bloodrose82's statement "And as has already been stated, proper English should be expected " Why should Proper English be expected when BJD are international and not everyone has the same educational opprotunities. My arguement is no less valid since I mispelt a word or two and have trouble understanding grammer. But this is just my opinion and no one has to agree with it. I just wanted to share it

 

Debate style? Wordy as heck. See below for example. ;D

My problem is when people put themselves in a discussion where debate may happen, such as asking for crtiques on their dolls/faceup/clothing/whatnot, and then specifically disallow "negative" comments.

Poster A: Here is my doll! What do you think?
Poster B: He's a great mold but I think his eyes are a bit googly and need to be straightened and his eyebrows look a bit too bushy. Maybe thin them out a bit? (Let's say this doll's eyes ARE googly and his eyebrows ARE bushy)
A: Well I didn't want opinions on his eyebrows as I'm happy with the eyebrows like that and his eyes aren't googly, he's giving a mischievous glance.
Poster C: I think his wig is a little large for his head and a bit tangled. Have you tried wig wax? That stuff works really well. (Let's say the wig really DOES look too large and too messy)
A: His wig is SUPPOSED to be that size and he's wearing the "bed head" look so he doesn't need wig wax thank you.
Poster D: The pants are cute but a bit too short on him because we can see his hip joint in the back. Maybe get him some longer pants or add a border to the ones he has on. It's a nice design otherwise, though! (Let's say the pants really DO look too short in an unprofessional way)
A: GOD. He's wearing low rise hip huggers! They're SUPPOSED to be like that! Look. If you can't say something nice, why are you here? NEW RULE! If you don't have anything nice to say about my doll, DON'T POST! I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT! I WILL REPORT YOU!
A: So what do people think of my doll?

If this is your idea of getting critiques, you're not asking for constructive criticism, you're asking that people stroke your dolly ego. If you can't handle politely-worded criticism, please consider posting in some other area that specifically bans non-completely-positive-and-supportive comments.

On the flip side, if you can't word your criticism politely, like the difference between, "His wig seems a little large and needs a bit of wig wax." versus "Your wig is fug. Get a new one. lol", then you shouldn't be posting either.

So in short, if you can't handle polite criticism, please go somewhere where polite criticism is banned. Do not go into a discussion area that specifically ALLOWS polite criticism and then throw a fit when you GET some. We are not here specifically to validate your self esteem or your ego about your dolly or doll-related skills. We are here to enjoy dolls, share knowledge, learn new things, and improve ourselves and this hobby so it continues to be a hobby that is entertaining, enjoyable, and enlightening.

I also get terrified of the idea of DoA mods searching OUTSIDE DoA for reasons to ban people INSIDE DoA. Who are DoA mods to legislate the morals of the world outside of DoA? I'm not saying any DoA mods do this, but I know a handful of posters who are forever trying to goad the mods into doing this sort of policing.

Poster A: B said something MEEN to me over on Dolly Fandumb board! I know their member name on here so you should punish them here! If you let them say whatever they want in LJ or at Dolly Fandumb board that hurts me and you don't punish them HERE, you're saying it's ok for people to say MEEN things about me or my dollies! If you don't punish them here, you're condoning MEENNESS!

I know people have made calls for everyone to be more tolerant on here, to agree to disagree and whatnot, but remember that the whole world doesn't exist to coddle you or protect you from unkind things. Should the world be a nicer place? Yes, but not only for YOU. If you're doing something wrong, if you're doing something poorly, if you're doing something not nice, you need to expect to be acalled out on it. You can demand they be POLITE about it, but the world is not here to put up with whatever you choose to dish out. You owe US as much as we owe YOU. If you make a fool of yourself willingly, you have no right to make us swallow it and smile at you, telling you how wonderful you are. Nor do you have the right to silence us out in the world. You may tell us we can't say it HERE INSIDE DoA, but you can't use DoA to control us OUTSIDE of DoA. The world does NOT belong to YOU.

 

Acknowledge the value in the opposite opinion and honestly expressing one's own in a rational way. In other words, no personal slams. Doll collectors are a pretty passionate bunch, in general, so it is great to see the level of passion about any issue as long as it doesn't become about personal attacks. It really comes down to respecting everyone even if there are disagreements.

 

MidnyteSun: I believe that most people are refering to "netspeak" when they ask to use Proper English, not honest misspellings and quirks of English-as-a-second-language grammar (which is a relief, 'cause I have an odd way of talking and can't spell worth anything! )
Netspeak, in my opinion, is actually a lot harder to read than someone who is honestly unfamiliar with the language and has a little trouble with spelling and maybe word order, and at the same time shows (to me, at least) a lack of effort in thinking thru your statements and taking the time to speak(type) them clearly.

 

Um, I don’t know if I have a style. I know I like to debate and usually I like to debate about things I feel passionate about and I can see where things could get out of hand. I believe, the best debaters don’t just read a textbook and spew what paragraph they remember, but have feelings behind it. However, that does not mean you shouldn’t except others views. I believe most everyone who reads it will get heated in one way or another, but once you calm down you should be able to look objectively at the topic and make sure your point was made.
One of my best friends is a literature major, and I look up to him and he debates so eloquently. So I strive constantly to debate like him.

A clean debate is one where no hard feelings are harbored. Sometimes I fear people will give me the “UGH, it’s her!” look and never talk to me again and then I wont have any friends. Sometimes that stops me from saying anything, but if I don’t say anything I get antsy and cant concentrate on anything else! It’s been stated, but as long as people understand that just because you debate doesn’t mean we cant be friends, and on this forum doll friends—then it should be ok!

Sometimes, I wish some topics could have a “last thoughts” round because usually when a debate topic goes really long the ones answering are the ones who’ve been answering the most! @_@

 

What is your debate style?

I like to see what other people are saying before I say my piece. A lot of times, other people have brought up ideas that might make me realize that their idea made sense. Sometimes I don't, and feel outnumbered if I'm in the minority - but I'll defend my point, and back up others who share my views if the topic calls for it.


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

A "clean" debate is one where we do our best to express ourselves as best we can without the worry that someone's going to jump out of the bushes and hit us with a baseball bat. I mean, you can be wrong - it's a way of life. Also, understand that, even though the debate is going totally one way, understand other people may think otherwise, and for good reason. Expect it, welcome it, deal with it. A different opinion does not make someone enemy #1. Expect that there are people on the forum who think differently than you, and try to understand them as best you can.

Also, try not to play victim. Maybe you're in the minority of a debate. You aren't being personally attacked, or cornered. All it means is that there happens to be a lot more people who feel the opposite of you do, but that can change in time. No one's trying to corner you. Take a deep breath, let it out, and maybe do something else for a while. Don't go spamming a thread accusing people of being insensitive or cruel. They may have been, sure, but take it up with a Mod who has the authority to do something about it. Trust me: you DON'T want to be the complainer.

What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?

I think unacceptable behaviors in a debate is personal attacks, for one. If your response to being in the debate's minority is to suddenly begin personal attacks, don't expect people to enter into future debates or conversations with you.

That being said, I expect some sense of camaraderie among most members, and for them to point out when one person has gone too far. But if things start to become kind of redundant (like the 'elitist' claims that sometimes suddenly appear), I think we should just ignore them, and continue with what we had been discussing before. Don't let a good debate become a bad one.

 

A very old thread revamped!

I believe ad hominem attacks and straw man arguments are logical fallacies that people fail to realize when they try to argue against others Language and semantics are very tricky things so it is best to be careful in how one words their argument.

In addition, it's best to cool down before you type something that you might regret later on. I know how passionate one can be in a debate but it's only a debate when there are no logical fallacies such as ad hominem or personal attacks.

Also, I always see "IMO" or "IMHO", when a person types that especially in caps or bold, I believe that that person knows he or she is being rude since a person wouldn't have to do that in the first place if he or she didn't think it was going to offend anyone. I feel that using these terms "IMO" or "IMHO" are used by people that don't own up to their beliefs and instead, draws unneeded attention with the bold letters or caps. Instead of "IMO" or "IMHO", why not try to use "I think", "I believe" or "I feel". I feel that those terms comes across more smoothly and politely.

 

My debating style: I think maybe I should just keep my mouth shut and my fingers off the keyboards from now on! I didn't go to a School/Uni where debating was on the curriculum and was quite interested at first when I saw the debate forum, thinking I would learn the rules as I went along but it's been a major disappointment. It often seems to be a haven for woolly thinking, personal attack and every third poster just repeating the same tired argument.

Is that what debate is supposed to be like? I'm not being sarcastic here, I'm genuinely asking if members on this thread, who seem articulate and have experience of formal debating, think that most of the debate threads on DOA are of a good standard? I've heard the phrase "devil's advocate" used a few times but what I have seen most often is someone using this stance to make petulant, flippant or downright ridiculous statements purely to provoke. There is no testing of the argument going on, just unpleasantness and a show of ego. * I am not referring to anyone who has used the phrase in this particular thread.

I also apologise, as this comment of mine is based purely on my emotions (of bafflement and disappointment mainly) and I am stating generalizations without providing reference, but I really do hope to find out more about debating.

 

What kills me about "debate" on this forum is the utter lack of logic applied to the actual subject, and the refusal of some to apply any kind of logic. I could bring up so many different examples, but then I would not sleep tonight.
I also hate the sheep mentality, and the willingness to go with the flow. The status quo, and the inability to form one's own opinions for fear of insulting the majority.
My debate style is to try to assess the truth in a situation, or to try and see what I can actually ascertain, and go from there.

 

At first, when I was reading posts, and I saw some of the grammar, I was like 'omg, really?!' Course, I never said anything because I'm not one to go online and become a grammar Nazi. I only do that in person, I promise. No, seriously, I do that - it's a habit.

But then I got to realizing that there were people from other countries. And lots of the grammar issues came from people whose native language wasn't English. So, as much as it's a little pet peeve of mine, I skip ones that would irritate me too much, but I don't correct them because it's not their fault.

 

Hmm somehow I missed this thread, so long ago...

What is your debate style?
I suck at debate. I experience the world primarily through feeling, and no matter how I try to *think* my way out of a problem, I'm still all wet. Mostly I have given up on it.

What do you think is acceptable in a "clean" debate? What behaviors do you think are unacceptable?
Picking on people is the worst. I've seen that more times than I can stand, but I think it's part of the internet culture, and being older, maybe I'm just not on board with that. I also dislike the schoolgirl popularity-politics thing, which I was never good at anyway, oh well!

I had an average education at an average small-town US high school. "Debate" was available as a class, but I don't even think at that age that I knew what it was, or what value it might have in one's life, which may be a dead giveaway as to my social class (ie trash). So be it. However, I can't be too hard on myself as I don't see any evidence that others are routinely better at it, sadly. Some might have a natural talent for it, in spite of a lack of education, but I'm not one of those. XD

So my style is not very engaged. I give my perspective and leave it at that. People can quote and shred to their hearts' content, I'm not going to defend how I "feel" on a given topic; I think doing that may be the antithesis of debate anyway.

In any case, no matter how smart we try to be... we are all doll collectors. I have been a doll person for 30 or so years; in general the level of education/intellect is appalling and lacking. I include myself in that, of course. You may feel superior if you wish, but I don't. Doll collectors tend to be hypersensitive and not very serious, for what it's worth. ^^:;

Raven

 

First of all, let me offer my standard disclaimer in a more visible location. What follows are my thoughts and opinions based on observation and experience. I don't have any reason to expect that I am wrong but I might well be. I've been known to be wrong before. I shall undoubtedly be wrong again. I'll have to live a whole lot longer than I have to know much more than how much I don't know. And the same applies to the rest of us as well.

What's my debate style?
I never had the opportunity to learn formal debate, as I came from a VERY tiny town where pretty much anything that wasn't basic instruction was off the list of possibilities. What little I know of formal logic I learned in law school -- the hard way (there's nothing quite as joyful and special as being shown just how full of it you are, in public, by a seasoned, veteran law professor! ). I am therefore usually -- but not always successfully -- careful to include disclaimers, to avoid absolutes, and to avoid illustrating my points with "glittering generalities." Because if I do so I will invariably be incorrect. And embarrassed as hell later on.

What behaviors are unacceptable?
I'd pretty much have to agree with Raven and others about the picking on people.
Another behavior that I unfortunately have less success with, sometimes, is responding in anger before CAREFULLY reading someone's post.

Now here's where it gets interesting for me. I was taught by a woman who was the Queen of Grammar Nazis (a very long time ago now). Everyone hated her. However, we all knew the rules of grammar, how to diagram sentences to see what they ACTUALLY SAID, and how to correct our own mistakes. I have long since forgotten a good deal of the technical stuff she taught us (and my ad-hoc writing is usually pretty lousy), but I still know how to parse a sentence for meaning. When I see the umpteenth iteration of someone composing a sentence that *says* something completely other than what the writer intended, and then jumping all over others for understanding what the sentence actually SAYS, it makes my brain hurt. I also tend to have a short fuse when I write something very carefully and intend it to mean exactly what it says, and people infer something that does not exist in the words on the screen. This makes for crappy debate style on my part .

English grammar and the correct use thereof is what makes lawyers' salaries generally much higher than that of those of us who do other things for a living. They learn how to read language as it is written, parse sentences out correctly, and use the plain meanings of what is written to their clients' advantages ("we're not talking about justice, we're talking about the LAW!"). I'm fairly confident the same thing happens in other languages in other places. And those language skills are in part what go to making up actual, logical debates, at least if I am understanding how a debate is supposed to work correctly. Someone makes a point; they back it up with facts, not opinions, and they cite language that underscores their point. Really good debaters that I've watched in action sometimes sound downright brutal and uncaring. They're not; they're just working with facts and words, not feelings and theories.

Unfortunately, that means that in a hobby setting where people are pretty much trying to relax, and where levels of basic reading comprehension skills are so widely divergent -- and where it's possible to invest so much raw emotion into the hobby and issues surrounding it -- it's not awfully likely that a real "debate" can happen. And I'm not sure that should matter, now that I ponder it more. Maybe calling the debate forum a debate forum is really a misnomer.

 

An interesting topic! I love debate, though I never studied it in school.

What is your debate style? I don't know that I have a "style," persay. I do know that my spelling sucks, and I type very quickly and so sometimes leave out letters or misplace spaces. I do try to stay on topic, though.

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

Like many others, the number one no-no is picking on people. Even more than picking on someone, constantly reffering back to a single, usually misunderstood post earlier in the thread and just picking it to death! I have, unfortunately, seen some people resort to ugly name-calling. Most people on the forum are generally nice and supportive, but everyone has "jerk" moments and sometimes those moments get the better or their keyboard.

Total divergence from the original topic also bothers me. People seem to get lost in a debate as it moves from the original topic to something so-and-so said, someone else comments, someone else agrees or disagrees, and within 10 posts the subject has little or nothing to do with the original question but is focused on so-and-so's statement! Conversations naturally move this way, but a debate is supposed to discuss the pros and cons of one particular subject, not wander all over the place. Ineveitably, almost every debate degrades to personal arguments until everyong subscribed to it bails on the thread and it lies dormant for a few months. Then someone stumbles across it, starts the debate afresh, and the cycle begin again. I think the problem is that most of the debates are only based on personal opinion with no hard data to back them up. Then it's just people fighting over who's right without being able to actually prove that they are right. (don't they call that religion?) The wanton straying from the original topic seems disrespectful to the OP andthe spirit of the debate.

And as for grammar nazis... *raises hand* I'm afraid I'm one of them. But I don't correct people I don't know, especially in an online forum, because I don't know if they might be foreign. I only correct my friends, a bad habit I picked up from my mother, and I'm one of the only people I know who knows the correct usage of me, I, and whom. Correcting someone you don't know is just rude.

And that's my two cents...

 

I tend to view debate here as not so much formalized debate with a points system and a 'winner', but as a discussion that has the potential to become more heated than the average discussion thread. It could be because there is no 'right' or 'wrong' to be found in the question being posed, it could be asking for opinions that may not be as positive as most when the answers start rolling in. I could be a million miles off on that, but that's how I approach it in general. The way I see it, if I come in to debate expecting people to follow this, that, or the other rules I've learned from somewhere else, it's just a recipe for frustration, as the board is full of people with such vastly divergent experience.

I'm more interested in discussing things and learning the varying opinions out there than I am about defending almost any position I might have on any given issue. I tend to play devil's advocate a great deal to this end; in these cases I'm not arguing my point, but trying to figure out the structure and reasoning someone else is using behind their point if it's unclear to me somehow. I try to make it clear when I'm doing this not because it's somehow more hostile or confrontational than anything else I'm saying, but to make it clear I'm not asking questions from my personal opinion or position, but from an abstract one.

I, quite simply, suck at tone. After years of participation on a variety of debate forums and various forums in general and being misread unto infinity, I really can't reach any other conclusion than this. As a I result, I can get more than a little long-winded in any explanation or discussion, and if I think I've been misunderstood, I'll attempt to clarify (usually, heavens help us all, at even greater length).

That, though, brings me to the one point of etiquette I wish was a universal: before putting words or motives in someone's mouth, at least clarify. Read that thing thrice over if you think you see some horrible thing tucked beneath the words that "must" mean someone is a baby-eating puppykicker before either snidely insinuating this about them or exploding on them. There is very little that gets me irritated so much as people putting words in my mouth, or ascribing some dire and insidious motive to a casual comment made in a discussion.

I think that if it's deliberate rather than a misunderstanding, it's pretty much the pinnacle of poor form in a debate like this one, which is (presumably) expected to remain cordial even in the face of disagreement. Think about it for a moment: how much do you enjoy someone speaking for you when you're perfectly capable of doing so yourself? What if they're saying something utterly contrary to what you're actually thinking or what you believe, and attributing it to you? I actually lump this sort of behavior in with personal attacks in its deliberate form. It's more subtle than typing, "surreality is a baby-eating puppykicker! Burn her!" sure, but attributing baby-eating or puppykicking to someone in an indirect fashion is just as obnoxious, and strikes me as being cowardly to boot.