To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 14268
14267  |  14269
Subject: 
Re: Larry's behaviour
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 24 Oct 2001 17:54:55 GMT
Viewed: 
916 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
Ban one of us. Do the poll I suggested.

As I'm sure you'd expect, I don't think the poll would be done as proposed.
I think it's an all-or-nothing type deal. I think given the choices, I'd
rank them as:

1. Ban neither of you
2. Ban both of you
3. Ban Scott
4. Ban Larry

Perhaps there should be a "poll of polls". :)


If I were forced to choose sides? Sure, I'd pick yours, admittedly. But to
do so would be allowing you to get away with petty theft, which as you
mentioned (and I agreed), isn't acceptable.

How about 1a. Ban both of them from replying to each other (at least as a
trial measure)? Or, at least, a moratorium on the codependent "he's a liar,
he's a squirmer" drivel...

Why not just institute basic formal debating rules? What is there to be lost
by doing that?

Scott A



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Larry's behaviour
 
(...) The reason, fairly obviously, is that there are only two real offenders whose behavior requires the formal implementation of formal rules. Larry and you both contribute useful points to some debates, but far more often than not, your (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  rules
 
(...) I don't think formal debating rules will work, here. The set I'm familiar with are too formal (8 minutes for argument, 8 minutes for response, 4 minutes for rebuttal, 4 minutes for rebuttal response) since they're structured for face to face (...) (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Larry's behaviour
 
(...) How about 1a. Ban both of them from replying to each other (at least as a trial measure)? Or, at least, a moratorium on the codependent "he's a liar, he's a squirmer" drivel... --DaveL (23 years ago, 24-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

118 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR