h a l f b a k e r yTempus fudge-it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Iraq debate board
a discussion board about the Iraq war on nytimes or cnn where logical arguments would be voted to the top | |
so the forum would look something like slashdot's, where arguments get voted into visibility based on their relevancy.
I could see this getting really interesting if it had a big enough readership. The quality would actually get higher with more posts rather than get polluted like most message boards.
Logical
arguments, made in public, it would be amazing.
U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum
http://www.uspoliti...line.com/indexf.php
[ldischler, Aug 18 2007]
urbandictionary.com
http://www.urbandic...p?term=o+rly&page=1
[bnip, Sep 08 2007]
[link]
|
| |
I smell another unproductive "what is half-baked?" argument coming... |
|
| |
I'd love to have such a system, I just don't have a clue how to enforce "logic". |
|
| |
How do you prevent people from voting for (a) their friends (b) funny people (c) people who merely share their (irrational) opinions? |
|
| |
How would you know that a vote had been cast on grounds of logic? Also, what makes you think that the logical arguments would be the popular ones? |
|
| |
o/t sorry, there is some chat at the moment about all religions referring to God as Allah (an arabic word for God) I cannot see the christians really going ahead with this at all. I propose calling him something new like - marshmallow. |
|
| |
One man's fallacy is another man's faith |
|
| |
// I just don't have a clue how to enforce "logic". |
|
| |
Easy: Autocratically, with force, authority, and withering self indignation. Don't spend time worrying whether it's actually logical, believe in yourself and everyone will follow like sheep. Hey, that's how the Iraq war started |
|
| |
Anyway, we'll win this war soon - we have marshmallow on our side. |
|
| |
Iraq Debate - Bored. bone |
|
| |
You've obviously not seen me iron... |
|
| |
You could sit on the Ironic Board. |
|
| |
Marshmallow is cute, but Christians like wine so how about --Marsallah? |
|
| |
That's for the Indian debate board, Shirley? As in, "Shall I have the Jalfrezi or the Chicken Tikka Marsallah?" |
|
| |
Not all Christians love the wine [xandram] (at least not openly). Some do the communion thing with white bread and water. |
|
| |
Some think the "wine" was unfermented grape juice. Others think the covenants changed more recently to disallow alcohol. Still others would say "Stop getting your logic all over my faith". |
|
| |
It was just a generalization. I didn't mean they all liked drinking wine, though I have watched priests who really seem to enjoy that early morning nip..
(no offense to any religion, I just enjoy word-play) |
|
| |
[Anathema Device], you copied the list of other ideas in this category (up there, top right) as well as this idea's header. |
|
| |
// Easy: Autocratically, with force, authority, and withering self indignation. Don't spend time worrying whether it's actually logical, believe in yourself and everyone will follow like sheep. |
|
| |
Except for the last bit, that's pretty much how this site is run, too. |
|
| |
Hey, did you just see a shepherd go by here? |
|
| |
The holy trinity will be henceforth named the Mallow, the Choccy and the Holy Toast, collectively known as S'mores. |
|
| |
maybe beating a dead horse, but.... just read all the posts and I'm still excited about it.
Main objection seems to be that it would be like most message boards.. cluttered and irrational.
I'm envisioning millions of patriotic American and Iraqi citizens checking this message board everyday though. I mean, it would be on nytimes.com, and I know EVERYBODY checks that daily...
And a voting process where the most popular arguments, and the most popular, relevant objections would surface to visibility.
I have changed - from 'logical' to 'popular'.
Popular is more interesting. |
|
| |
this would be vastly different from political forum sombody posted... that would look like a database compared to what I'm envisioning. This would be parsed down so 10 year olds could understand it. |
|
| |
I'll stop for now and prepare for the next round of beatings.
anyone? |
|
| |
Ok. Let's start with //millions of patriotic American and Iraqi citizens checking this message board everyday though. I mean, it would be on nytimes.com, and I know EVERYBODY checks that daily... //. |
|
| |
How many Iraqis have internet access? How many speak English? How many read the NY Times? I mean, I'm English and I've haven't been there once. |
|
| |
How's about putting it on the Al Sabah website? |
|
| |
how would you get new stuff in if you have all the populer stuff at the top? no one would wwant to post anything thats not going to get read by somone. |
|
| |
Heh! I presume you meant a random subatomic event? |
|
| |
[+] I'm envisioning something like urbandictionary.com (link), where one can vote correct definitions upward in the ranking and vote incorrect ones downward (and it somehow doesn't let you "stuff the ballot box," at least not too easily). It's satisfying to vote, and the results are helpful to the information-seeking reader. Although the issues aren't so black-and-white in a political debate, it would still be useful, in my opinion. |
|
| |
As far as "how to enforce 'logic,'" one doesn't. People vote freely, and in the long run, if a lot of people vote, good arguments would probably tend to rise and bad ones would probably tend to sink. If they don't, they don't. (One should take the rankings with a grain of salt.) But that's that's all I think kerryoco meant by logical arguments being voted to the top. |
|
| |
Being able to vote might also cut down on the number of "me, too!" and "ditto!" comments on discussion boards. |
|
| |
Discussion boards like this would be
more suitable for local politics. Many
people who could understand and are
affected by the issues follow only in a
peripheral, desultory way. Such boards
would have fewer participants and be
easier to keep up with. Also, the
participants in such a board would have
a much greater chance of influencing
the issue in question. |
|
| |