EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
2053

Video Debate: Political Ideologies

(PRO)
WINNER!
6 points
(CON)
0 points


Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
adminadmin
"At one point you did away with the consecutive forfeit from two different people function"

no, I don't think I ever did away with that. I was, however, for a time extremely reluctant to implement it in the first place. I didn't think it was necessarily fair. Still not sure about it. nzlockie campaigned hard for it though and in the end I gave in.
Posted 2015-09-13 04:27:10
BlackflagBlackflag
No, I am upset by your ineptitude and lack of judgement.

At one point you did away with the consecutive forfeit from two different people function, and now it is back just when it would give you a win. Unbelievable!
Posted 2015-09-13 04:24:49
adminadmin
I forfeited because you self-admittedly chose to forfeit the previous round. If you didn't want to debate me, I won't force you.
Posted 2015-09-12 19:57:46
BlackflagBlackflag
Okay, that is some serious bullshit.

Why did you forfeit, I wanted to continue the debate?

The two consecutive forfeit rule needs to go, it is retarded!
Posted 2015-09-12 17:31:52
BlackflagBlackflag
Oh, you meant this debate? No, of course I don't want to forfeit.
Posted 2015-08-29 00:29:25
adminadmin
Pfft, wut? Priest has beaten me more than I've beaten him. My rating has gone down from that, not up. And besides, I put in effort for that. Your effort in this debate is almost zero.
Posted 2015-08-28 21:36:57
BlackflagBlackflag
@admin

I'll do it, but I just want you to know that you have all those free wins from Priest of Swag, so I think you should be the one who should be conceding.
Posted 2015-08-28 18:14:30
BlackflagBlackflag
@Swag

No, I did not

I lack actual chargers, so I mostly just USB shit from point A to point B
Posted 2015-08-28 18:12:45
adminadmin
@Stag - how would you like to be the first on edeb8 to concede a debate with the new "concede debate" feature?
Posted 2015-08-28 15:02:48
Dassault PapillonDassault Papillon
Did you try using a different charger on your tablet? I've had to replace my Kindle's charger at least once, and I generally find that a new charger almost always gets the job done.
Posted 2015-08-25 12:11:00
BlackflagBlackflag
I wanted to get my hands on a camera. Filming with a tablet is frustrated, and I don't want to be propping up a camera against my face while trying to deliver an important speech.

I did want to use it closer to the deadline, but it was defective by then. Make no mistakes though. There were ways I could have solved this problem in 14 days. I chose not to go down these paths, and for that I am guilty.
Posted 2015-08-25 02:49:42
adminadmin
Then you could have plugged it in while filming
Posted 2015-08-25 02:42:16
adminadmin
Why did you decide against filming with a tablet?
Posted 2015-08-25 02:41:58
BlackflagBlackflag
My tablet refused to charge. It would only go up by 1% after 12 hours or so of charging.
Posted 2015-08-25 02:41:18
BlackflagBlackflag
No admin, I decided against filming with a tablet.

It wouldn't of been unreasonable for me to get a video camera Swag. I just didn't want to have to borrow one, and you are right, I don't have the money to spend on luxury items like video cameras. That isn't an excuse though. I should of found a way!
Posted 2015-08-25 02:40:40
adminadmin
You rehearsed it and weren't satisfied with it? Is that your excuse? Boy...

This is why I do videos with no rehearsal...
Posted 2015-08-25 02:37:38
Dassault PapillonDassault Papillon
And obviously it'd be ridiculous to expect you to spend $100+ for a video camera just for some internet debate, so...
Define "defective", though.
Posted 2015-08-25 02:36:13
BlackflagBlackflag
I did have a tablet with a video camera. That was my original plan.

After rehearsing a couple times, I decided against it. I then later planned to use it about a week before the deadline, but it was defective, lol
Posted 2015-08-25 02:22:00
adminadmin
Why even challenge me in that case?
Posted 2015-08-25 02:06:52
BlackflagBlackflag
No. I kind of gave up on looking three days before the deadline. I could of borrowed a video camera, but that comes with its own drawbacks
Posted 2015-08-25 02:01:24
Dassault PapillonDassault Papillon
Do you have a way to film it now?
Posted 2015-08-25 01:55:16
BlackflagBlackflag
I didn't have a way to film it when I challenged you
Posted 2015-08-25 01:48:52
adminadmin
Figures
Posted 2015-08-25 01:28:36
Dassault PapillonDassault Papillon
24 hours or so left...
Posted 2015-08-24 00:44:22
adminadmin
I guess the odds are just stacked in my favor now
Posted 2015-08-22 02:32:18
adminadmin
I've got my money on first round too.
Posted 2015-08-18 00:06:49
nzlockienzlockie
There is NO WAY this debate doesn't end in a forfeit. My money is on the first round.
Posted 2015-08-18 00:05:15
BlackflagBlackflag
Bear with me, I still don't have a way to film at the moment
Posted 2015-08-16 04:02:40
adminadmin
Well let's find out when you make your argument...
Posted 2015-08-15 23:55:59
BlackflagBlackflag
Almost all anarchists promote a form of government and varying degrees of social organization. How hard is it for people to understand the concept of rule by influence, and not by intimidation?
Posted 2015-08-15 17:37:27
adminadmin
I deliberately made my arguments extremely vague because I wasn't sure what position you wanted to advocate. Therefore I am happy if many of my arguments become irrelevant.

I agree that a few anarchists are progressive liberals, in that some small number of anarchists have a very broad sense of "government" (for example, I've seen the argument that a free market can function like a government, with tradeable laws etc). A political ideology is an end, not a means. Policy is the means.

I'm prepared no matter which way you take it anyway, so I don't really mind.
Posted 2015-08-15 10:20:10
BlackflagBlackflag
The problem with this debate is that your self-defined "ideology" mirrors the more popular variants of anarchism.

Many anarchists by your own definition are progressive liberals that reject authority backed organization for resolving social issues.

Anarchism is the abolition of the state, but not the abolition of social organization and programs, and under almost all conceptualizations of anarchism (including the communist ones), societies are overseen by democratic bodies that organize through influence and not authority.

When I saw your arguments, I realized that pointing this simple fact out would change the entire direction of the debate, and would likely make most of your arguments irrelevant besides the avocation of authority, which would be about all we would end up debating.

I have been struggling on how to approach this for the last couple of days. What do you think?
Posted 2015-08-15 09:46:03
adminadmin
It makes great practice for speed-writing, that's for sure. I can listen fairly fast but keeping good notes is tough. You are, as a judge, usually allowed some time between speeches and after the debate to have a think.
Posted 2015-08-13 08:21:01
nzlockienzlockie
I get that talking fast is the convention with spoken debate, but I find it hard to follow.
Judges must be pretty good at their job I think.
Posted 2015-08-13 07:43:49
BlackflagBlackflag
I think they are a pretty big deal to the people debating.

They are considered to be spokesman of their belief system. It is desirable to be well spoken, because you want people to continue to buy your books.
Posted 2015-08-12 22:34:39
adminadmin
I find most of those to be noncompetitive in nature. More like philosophical exercises that don't translate well to a competitive medium.
Posted 2015-08-12 20:01:46
BlackflagBlackflag
Hmm, you are thinking along the lines of debate associations. I am thinking along the lines of scheduled debates organized between one or more groups.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:59:37
adminadmin
I say "at most 15 minutes", usually about 20-25 minutes was assigned for prep, but half of that was almost always used on finding your debate room, working out which topic you were doing with your opposition, and other such administrative thingys.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:56:49
adminadmin
We usually got at most 15 minutes prep. I didn't like speaking first because of limited room for rebuttal.

There's only one prepared debate tournament in the country. I went once - it wasn't really that fun. I think it imposed on people's structure, like, they'd cite real facts and things as if they counted for anything. That pushed down a lot of teams. With the huge number of cases to memorize (we had to remember 8 just for the regular rounds, not even including the break rounds) most people also got very tired as the tournament wore on and just wished it to be over. Oh and besides, I was pissed off at having to speak 3rd, my university had really not thought through their team picks. Our first speaker pretty much gave up in the last 3 rounds. Second was good other than that he stole my spot. Still, not the funnest tournament.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:54:36
BlackflagBlackflag
The first speech should be prepped and memorized. In a planned debate, you should make brief outlines of possible arguments and possible responces for your second speech.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:48:01
adminadmin
In proper debates at higher levels, everything is pretty much impromptu with extremely limited preparation. I used to take about a page of notes for a 6-8 minute speech, 3/4 of which would be written while I was waiting for my turn to speak (I usually was the 2nd speaker in 2 teams of 3, and delivered the reply speeches) because rebuttals are super hard to remember.

Of course in a time-limited debate I tend to speak a LOT faster lol. Makes my voice go all high-pitched and stuff, it's weird. A few of my clashes with Hello-Orange (and his various alts) on DDO show me doing this.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:36:41
BlackflagBlackflag
Plus, you strike me as the person who gets in a lot of real life arguments. Me too.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:32:26
BlackflagBlackflag
On the contrary, I believe that preparation always leads to better speaking. If I do not write myself guidelines, I pause a lot and am subject to repeating things multiple times.

With people I know, on subjects I am passionate about, I have no trouble winging a powerful speech. That doesn't seem proper in a formal debate though.
Posted 2015-08-12 19:31:54
adminadmin
No. Did others see that happening?

It could be because my webcam drops frames regularly, but it isn't normally enough to be noticeable. Or, more likely, YouTube was lagging somehow.
Posted 2015-08-12 18:20:15
Dassault PapillonDassault Papillon
Admin's mouth and the words that came out of it weren't in sync. Did you record your voice ahead of time, play it during the video, and move your mouth randomly so as to cause you to appear to be talking?
Posted 2015-08-12 18:17:23
adminadmin
Oh, you write your speech? I always just wing it! I had exactly 4 words written for my speech there haha.
Posted 2015-08-12 00:47:59
BlackflagBlackflag
... *Sigh*

Yeah, fine. I am going over my notes and have written the first two minutes of my speech (although my pace is a lot faster so it actually composes about 6 minutes of your speech)
Posted 2015-08-11 14:37:16
adminadmin
Discussion as opposed to debate material. You have rather a big habit of forfeiting to me... and yet you constantly write screeds of comments. So get back into debating and stop whining here.
Posted 2015-08-11 06:04:02
BlackflagBlackflag
The comments are made for discussion m8.

There should be no dictation of where people are allowed to express their viewpoints on a debate site
Posted 2015-08-11 06:02:09
adminadmin
I'm not saying you're out of material, only that this is the wrong place for it.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:57:01
adminadmin
Stop flooding the comments and get back to the debate.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:56:36
BlackflagBlackflag
I have a million more where that came from. If I were worried about running out of material, I would of never started this debate to begin with.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:56:29
BlackflagBlackflag
States shouldn't exist to control people? Then what are they good for?

I am empowered by writers, speakers, cinema, literature, ect.

Everyone wants a social revolution, but most are convinced that it needs to take place within the realm of an existing political structure. That is their first mistake. If you want something, you need to take it. The system only works because we accept it as legitimate.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:55:22
adminadmin
Again, save the lines for your video. They do you no good here in the comments.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:53:04
BlackflagBlackflag
"The establishment gave birth to a bitch named society. Silent majority or not, society will always be empowered enough to shun you for being different"

Posted 2015-08-11 05:52:02
adminadmin
Which is great because I think states should empower people, not control people. Anyway, let's also stop commenting and get on with the debate.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:16:12
BlackflagBlackflag
Arguing isn't fun for me, nor should it. It makes a great platform for critical thinking, but in general arguing tears people apart.

I want to live in a society in which people determine their own places in society, instead of having a bunch of ambitious pretenders acting like they actually care about the state and wellbeing of others in which they have never met, which they advocate by pushing more policies of control and conformity.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:14:30
adminadmin
I'm glad we have things to argue.
Posted 2015-08-11 05:09:19
BlackflagBlackflag
Okay, so I just finished your video and took some notes.

Freedom and equality come from more government? I'll have fun with that one, lol
Posted 2015-08-11 05:07:55
nzlockienzlockie
Nice tie!
#A-game
Posted 2015-08-11 04:58:17
adminadmin
I still think it's ridiculous if the goal is to imitate offline debate, which I kinda see the goal of the site as being.

Still, I'd be very open to a site vote on the matter via the feature tracker. I don't even feel strongly enough to vote, myself.
Posted 2015-08-11 02:40:40
BlackflagBlackflag
I said that I have seen debates with 20 minute rounds, and you claimed that was ridiculous. I would extend 13 minutes and 16 minutes.

I have to make my speech short because people will just skip over portions of my round (and if you do this you are an asshole.) Anarchism is a non-mainstream ideology, so it definitely takes more to open people's eyes.
Posted 2015-08-11 02:38:09
adminadmin
Should there be longer time limits available for videos? Could this be a feature request to add?
Posted 2015-08-11 02:23:30
BlackflagBlackflag
21 minutes? Come on m8, I was going to do 10 minutes per round. 13 minutes for my first round for intro reasons.

This is one helluva long speech, good job I guess ;)
Posted 2015-08-11 02:19:38
adminadmin
Video will finish processing in an hour or so.
Posted 2015-08-11 01:28:49
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2015-09-22 16:32:41
RXR.Judge: RXR.    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: admin
2015-09-13 23:16:54
nzlockieJudge: nzlockie    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: admin
2015-09-11 15:35:07
TejreticsJudge: Tejretics
Win awarded to: admin
Reasoning:
Pro wins as result of the forfeit. A forfeit (1) hinders Con's ability to present any arguments, and (2) is generally considered unacceptable conduct in any debate setting. Con failed to present any arguments, and dropped Pro's case. The forfeit is a direct reason for me -- as a judge -- to vote for the Affirmative as a result of both poor conduct and lack of argumentation. Ergo, I vote Pro.
0 comments on this judgement
2015-09-29 20:03:35
ColeTrainJudge: ColeTrain
Win awarded to: admin

Rules of the debate

  • Video debate
  • Individual debate
  • 3 rounds
  • No length restrictions
  • No reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Community Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 2 weeks
  • Time to vote: 1 month
  • Time to prepare: None