Amusing idea...

Tentative 1, with a possible 3 if you consider that this is a post about discussion of an idea. Not the actual idea itself. Constructive feedback has been generated.

I understand this point was made as a clever way of saying "Shut up" and I'll grant you this was probably the most inventive way of stating that I have ever seen! Kudos. However your own personal tastes do not necessarily reflect the tastes of others.

Kindly allow people to make up their own minds.

Ideally both sides would agree to the process. I understand other "litigators" may not adhere to the arrangement, however since this ideally would go into a moderated area where participation itself would be limited to those the litigators call on, moderation could require agreement from both parties before such a thread was opened.

With regard to representing both sides equally, the idea is to have 1 debater argue one sides point and another debater argue the other sides. I feel its a bit schzophrenic to argue with yourself, and although the thought entertains me of this happening, Im not sure its something I personally am attracted to!

Discovery would be simple. Go by the adage "screenshot or it didnt happen" and you'll get what Im shooting for. These arent real legal proceedings and Im not really interested in entertainment that is overly complicated. This is just an exercise in debate using the game forum as the discussion medium, and a clients dispute as the topic at hand. The fun would be as much in seeing what the other side came up with for arguing points as constructing your own case.

Circumstantial Evidence would be allowed provided that there was actual tangible evidence that corroborated it. Thats my own personal viewpoint though. Another arguer could pick different rules as would suit their own individual styles. IMO the best cases would allow circumstantial evidence in the manner I would use them, but I could be wrong. It wouldnt be the first time.

Who would actually decide is an interesting question. Its not that I havnt thought about it, but Im reasonably confident forum moderators would not want to be part of this as their job is already hard enough. At the moment Im leaving this open to discussion as anyones guess is as good as mine!

Youre correct, an unmoderated discussion with unwilling participants would serve as flame bait. In fact its possible that the discussion would be flame bait regardless of how it was handled. However theres a possibility that it would not be as well if handled in the appropriate manner. Im simply raising the question that this type of thing may be viable. Is it? I dont know. But it could be, and this I think is what makes the topic worthy of discussion.

 

Aside from the sentence above the rest of the post you wrote is rubbish (UK slang). Actually this is also rubbish but it amuses me to reply to it so I will.

It seems Sionkiewicz and I are engaged in a discussion. Its actually in the post you responded to. Convenient how you ignored that. Since A and B are having a productive discussion if you have nothing of value to contribute kindly C your way out.

(letters bolded because I copy/pasted his name and bold toggle seems to not be working on the text anymore -- not because of some anger on my part. This posters response made me laugh, not frown! :-D)

 

Reading Comprehension - Free Worksheets

 

Her observation can be summed up as: I dont like it. My friends dont like it. Therefore everyone doesnt like it. 37 posts was her count, correct? Page 3 is mostly flames. They havnt even engaged the discussion at hand, instead theyve attacked me as a person. As the discussion was not entitled "Does Magyar suck or does he not suck" their attacks on me personally had no value to the topic at hand.

She's simply trolling. The difference between you and her is youre asking questions that can actually be addressed. Shes just being a bitch.

Well, if one wants to act like a dog I say treat them like one.

If I can offer Shadowsong a suggestion, why dont you make a separate post where you can discuss how much I suck as a human being? That seems to be what you want to discuss anyway. So have at it. I promise to give you all the free reign you want. In fact, I wont even fight it. Go enjoy yourself.

 

I read that when I was 11. Good book, Andrew Carnegie's method is very successful when employed in the business world. I however feel his methodology should not be applied to personal interactions as it is not honest.

However I do understand that people are more easily led by smiles, flag waving, and lame jokes than by education and complex thought. This is why sports have cheerleaders, why rodeos have clowns, and why people like Will Farrell movies better than they like Woody Allen movies. This is also why Shadowsong, Oleg, and other big guys on these forums have such glorious reputations. Its not that they do anything unique or valuable. They simply wave flags around that say "applause" and people do as theyre told.

Here's a fun fact about flags: Hitler waved one too, and people loved him for it.

Never trust anyone with a flag in their hand.

 

Pretty much this. And yes youre quite right my threads are easily misunderstood by people. I was expecting by now for instance for someone to have at least said "Oh my god you are saying these people are Hitler!" Im fairly surprised that such a cheap and twisted tactic has not been tried, to be honest. It would have been very easy to attempt, and probably a very popular attack.

The truth of the matter on internet communication is I use too many big words and complicated sentences. People lose patience reading them very quickly. Internet communication is best kept short, sweet, and to the point. Lots of pictures also need to be used.

People on the net dont want to read, they want to be entertained.