F1 Debate Team

[Quiet One 15]

Polls are a stupid popularity contest. If the object of this exercise is to raise the tone (which I hope it is), polls are just a waste with people voting on their biases. A small varied jury with non anonymous voting and who have to explain their reasoning is much better.

I agree with this, specially with the bolded bit. I think the whole debate idea is not about the end result, as it is a pointless exercise trying to find out who is the best [subliminal message] Alonso, Kubica and Renaut are the best [/subliminal message] but rather an opportunity for each side to understand different views. It's not about the destination but the trip itself. As such, I think that it is better to keep an ongoing and interesting debate than to have a meaningless poll result.

So, basically, Adam, Cav, George and me are saying the same thing over and over again. We need a moderator for this thread to stop us! See? It's useful!

[Kopite Girl 0]

Ok Cav, now I get you. Whats everyone else thinking?

[Max Mosley 2]

I agree with this, specially with the bolded bit. I think the whole debate idea is not about the end result, as it is a pointless exercise trying to find out who is the best [subliminal message] Alonso, Kubica and Renaut are the best [/subliminal message] but rather an opportunity for each side to understand different views. It's not about the destination but the trip itself. As such, I think that it is better to keep an ongoing and interesting debate than to have a meaningless poll result.

So, basically, Adam, Cav, George and me are saying the same thing over and over again. We need a moderator for this thread to stop us! See? It's useful!

Btw just for clarity I can't figure out if you are all saying the same thing. Cav and others seem to want some kind of result (in their case, from a jury/panel) after the debate whereas you don't care about it?

Personally I tend to agree with what Andres says about the result being meaningless. Think about it this way: one day even I might be on the panel to declare who 'won' the debate. So anyone who thinks that drivers should obey the rules, that teams should innovate and that opinions should be respected will be up against it...

On the other hand, for entertainment's sake maybe some people want a clear result, which is fine by me either by poll or 'expert' panel. Both seem equally pointless imho.

[AleHop 0]

So....when's this going to start then? Any clues on who'll we will be debating over first?

You can start in the other thread with Tommy about the penalty for Alonso in the pit-lane. I will be the moderator.

[Rainmaster 7]

I agreed with Cav who agrees with Adam, but then Andres also quoted Cav's post and modified it to make the point that the end result isn't particularly important, rather the journey is, which I also agree with, Murray!

[yurp 0]

I agreed with Cav who agrees with Adam, but then Andres also quoted Cav's post and modified it to make the point that the end result isn't particularly important, rather the journey is, which I also agree with, Murray!

And I agree with you.

[Kopite Girl 0]

Ok. If Andres wants to open a thread, titled something like F1 Debate - and in the descrip put who or what its about. Something easy but not too easy to break us in should do the trick, to test the waters.

The first subject will be mark webber, good enough to be at red bull?

As i need to choose the team leaders who will choose their own teams, i'd like to enlist the help of Mike in doing this. What about Andres and James. Andres for, James against?

[yurp 0]

Ok. If Andres wants to open a thread, titled something like F1 Debate - and in the descrip put who or what its about. Something easy but not too easy to break us in should do the trick, to test the waters.

The first subject will be mark webber, good enough to be at red bull?

As i need to choose the team leaders who will choose their own teams, i'd like to enlist the help of Mike in doing this. What about Andres and James. Andres for, James against?

I thought Andres was moderator (speaker) - Mike didn't want me to be, so I stepped down.

I'm not actually debating either - so I'll shut up now.

[AutoRacer5 0]

Debate of course!

Cav. Read the thread mate!

YAY. AR5 is back! Welcome back Chris!

Thanks

[Kopite Girl 0]

I thought Andres was moderator (speaker) - Mike didn't want me to be, so I stepped down.

I'm not actually debating either - so I'll shut up now.

I've just made a complete twat of myself. I can't f*cking remember what was said to me ten minutes ago. I couldn't remember my own DOB, i forgot my address, and now I've gone and messed this up. Its frustrating the sh1t out of me, and beginning to show, even here.

Sorry guys. Well, I gave you the concept of the idea its up to you what to do with it now.

And I'm sure Mike won't take offence but I want you as a part of this.

[yurp 0]

I've just made a complete twat of myself. I can't f*cking remember what was said to me ten minutes ago. I couldn't remember my own DOB, i forgot my address, and now I've gone and messed this up. Its frustrating the sh1t out of me, and beginning to show, even here.

Sorry guys. Well, I gave you the concept of the idea its up to you what to do with it now.

And I'm sure Mike won't take offence but I want you as a part of this.

Okay - let's just do this - I'll take the bull by the horns.

If it works it works, if not, we can talk about how to improve it...

I'll start a new thread.

I won't do anything but lay out the guidelines and then add the poll at the end.

Question - "Does Webber deserve a Red Bull?"

Moderator - Andres

Duties:

Keep debaters in line - Andres, you know how to do this. Just jump in if you need to, but try to avoid it otherwise.

Receive questions in your message inbox from other users and choose which to put to the debaters. (see Format below)

Teams, picked out of hat (coffee cup) - leaders in bold...

Yes Team:

The Professor

Argento Reloaded

Kopite Girl

JHS

No Team:

Cavallino

AutumnPuma

BradSpeedMan

Questioners:

Anyone

NB - QUESTIONS FROM QUESTIONERS SHOULD BE SENT TO ANDRES BY PM NOT ADDED TO THREAD DIRECTLY

This way Andres can moderate the questions and order them well in a single post for each team. (see Format below)

Jury:

Monza

AleHop

Max Mosley

piquettheterrible2

Tommy

We will have a jury and a public poll - The jury will offer their verdicts in a post each - the poll will be there for anyone to have a vote at the end.

Format:

Open thread - set starting date for debate 4 days later (give teams a chance to prepare)

Part 1

Yes Team Leader opening statement

No Team Leader opening statement

Yes Team 2nd member argument

No Team 2nd member argument

Yes Team 3rd member argument

No Team 3rd member argument

Yes Team Leader summing up

No Team Leader summing up

Part 2

Andres - questions for Yes Team (received via PM from questioners, moderated and ordered by Andres)

Yes Team Leader, 2nd member and 3rd member rebuttals to questions. (1 post each)

Andres - questions for No Team (received via PM from questioners, moderated and ordered by Andres)

No Team Leader, 2nd member and 3rd member rebuttals to questions. (1 post each)

Andres calls on jury and sums up arguments from Teams (impartial - NOT judgement)

Jury Verdicts (5 posts, one from each jury member including judgement - Yes or No win)

Andres pronunces winners according to jury verdict

Open poll (Public verdict)

[yurp 0]

It's done...

http://www.totalf1.com/forums/topic/11372-first-total-f1-debate/

[yurp 0]

Have pm'ed everyone apart from Cav - he can't receive any new messages apparently.

I'll leave it up to his team to make sure he knows.

You all have 4 days to get ready before Andres starts us off.

Have fun people

[Bredda Natty 0]

Great idea Steph! Tho I don't have much time due to work and am a silent member most of the time, I'll send in my questions/follow thread as much as possible.

Ollie

[Autumnpuma 0]

*sigh*

Adam, I wasn't meaning to attack you at all (just to clear the air about that). I don't believe any one person could be completely without bias against or for a particular topic or poster...I picked you as my example because you were the first to volunteer for the post. I would say the same thing about anyone. Calling that person a 'judge' or 'moderator' or even 'banana' doesn't change anything.

Here's the straight poop, so to speak: I prefer a good discussion to a structured debate. I like expressing my ideas in a way that will be understood clearly (I hope). Think of a group of people around a table, liquid refreshment in hand, a few bags of unhealthy munchies strewn about and a good swapping of bullSh#te. Nobody's ideas thrown out because they're 'illogical' or don't follow a structured format. The idea is more important to me than the manner in which it's presented.

However, there are people that prefer the structured debate. It's a sort of strategy game to them. Good on 'em, but that's not my style.

That being said, since I've been nominated to a team and there's an interesting question afoot, I'll give 'er a shot. But Denny Crane I ain't.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Polls are a stupid popularity contest. If the object of this exercise is to raise the tone (which I hope it is), polls are just a waste with people voting on their biases. A small varied jury with non anonymous voting and who have to explain their reasoning is much better.

Since the 'jury' will be selected from the broader pool of people voting in the poll, won't we see the same biases arise? I suppose that will come out with the 'explaining their reasoning' bit. What the hell, lets see how this works.

[yurp 0]

*sigh*

Adam, I wasn't meaning to attack you at all (just to clear the air about that). I don't believe any one person could be completely without bias against or for a particular topic or poster...I picked you as my example because you were the first to volunteer for the post. I would say the same thing about anyone. Calling that person a 'judge' or 'moderator' or even 'banana' doesn't change anything.

Here's the straight poop, so to speak: I prefer a good discussion to a structured debate. I like expressing my ideas in a way that will be understood clearly (I hope). Think of a group of people around a table, liquid refreshment in hand, a few bags of unhealthy munchies strewn about and a good swapping of bullSh#te. Nobody's ideas thrown out because they're 'illogical' or don't follow a structured format. The idea is more important to me than the manner in which it's presented.

However, there are people that prefer the structured debate. It's a sort of strategy game to them. Good on 'em, but that's not my style.

That being said, since I've been nominated to a team and there's an interesting question afoot, I'll give 'er a shot. But Denny Crane I ain't.

Okay Mike

I understand your concerns.

Hopefully Andres won't have to do much. If things are kept within the bounds of polite discussion and opinions are justified/backed up, then really he won't have to do anything - if that happens, bias shouldn't come into it.

The one major duty he will have is to compile the list of questions from the floor (that should accumulate in his inbox) into an organised and polite post and present them to the teams.

Like you, I enjoy the free-for-all discussion we usually have around here. It will be interesting to see how this experiment goes. Because of the regulations and the presence of a jury/moderator, we might be able to avoid the usual problems (people not reading their oponent's posts, repetition of dead arguments, personal accusations etc etc). As Cav says it might lift the tone - which can't be a bad thing.

Let's see. If it fails, it fails.

Hope you're getting your arguments together.

My persnal bias says Webber doesn't deserve a Red Bull - so don't let me down!

[Autumnpuma 0]

Let's see. If it fails, it fails.

I hope it doesn't fail. Steph had a good idea with this.

My persnal bias says Webber doesn't deserve a Red Bull - so don't let me down!

You don't think he deserves a Red Bull? What about his stunning pace in the dog of a Jaguar? Or his...wait...

I'm on the other side, aren't I? Oh dear.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Have pm'ed everyone apart from Cav - he can't receive any new messages apparently.

I'll leave it up to his team to make sure he knows.

You all have 4 days to get ready before Andres starts us off.Have fun people

ok cool, sounds great!!!!

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Have pm'ed everyone apart from Cav - he can't receive any new messages apparently.

I'll leave it up to his team to make sure he knows.

You all have 4 days to get ready before Andres starts us off.

Have fun people

We could confine the debate to the weekend, we use the 5 working days to prepare. Every weekend we have a debate. That way we don't inconvience some poster's who's behind gmt times etc.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Cav, I see you around but can't post to you dude.....

[Kopite Girl 0]

I hope it doesn't fail. Steph had a good idea with this.

You don't think he deserves a Red Bull? What about his stunning pace in the dog of a Jaguar? Or his...wait...

I'm on the other side, aren't I? Oh dear.

The gauntlet is down, homie.

Slap me before I continue to act like a knob. Thanks.

[Quiet One 15]

Adam, Adam, what have you done?

Ok, now I see that my idea was something more like an open debate, as Mike pointed out, but moderated, as Adam pointed out. I misunderstood the whole thing, I guess. I am not too fond of people having to make an arguments on things they do not believe in but if it's ok with everybody I will moderate the debate, nonetheless. I am just not sure I will be up to the challenge if it comes to being a participant in something like "Lotus: the best of the new teams?" as I couldn't care less about Lotus

As for my interference will be minimal. I envisioned the mods role much like a boxing referee, his main role being to prevent guys from punching below the belt. I won't have much of an introduction to make so I will probably just give a few guidelines on some usual sophisms and fallacies, if that's ok.

[Max Mosley 2]

*sigh*

Adam, I wasn't meaning to attack you at all (just to clear the air about that). I don't believe any one person could be completely without bias against or for a particular topic or poster...I picked you as my example because you were the first to volunteer for the post. I would say the same thing about anyone. Calling that person a 'judge' or 'moderator' or even 'banana' doesn't change anything.

Here's the straight poop, so to speak: I prefer a good discussion to a structured debate. I like expressing my ideas in a way that will be understood clearly (I hope). Think of a group of people around a table, liquid refreshment in hand, a few bags of unhealthy munchies strewn about and a good swapping of bullSh#te. Nobody's ideas thrown out because they're 'illogical' or don't follow a structured format. The idea is more important to me than the manner in which it's presented.

However, there are people that prefer the structured debate. It's a sort of strategy game to them. Good on 'em, but that's not my style.

That being said, since I've been nominated to a team and there's an interesting question afoot, I'll give 'er a shot. But Denny Crane I ain't.

I agree with all that completely! Hopefully this structured debate idea will only be in one thread at a time. It's fun to have variety though.

[yurp 0]

The Professor has bowed out - mainly because he can't face defending Mark Webber, but he says it's because he hasn't enough time to make 3 posts.

Shocking behaviour.

Anyway - that promotes Argento Reloaded to team leader of the Yes team and JHS has been drafted in to fill the void.

I'll pm him now.

Changes have been made above and in the debate thread.