News: Rules Of Debate

[AB Editor]

Good Afternoon,

It seems a few of you are getting a little ruffled around the boa. I wondered if we could agree on some basic guidelines for debating in the News section of the AnswerBank.

Here's what I have to start with:

1. If you present a statistic, back it up - If you can't, expect to have the statistic dismissed.

2. Silence is not evidence - Just because someone hasn't condemmned the actions of someone or other in a news story doesn't mean they support them. Do not assert as much.

3. To further point 2: Only work with what people say - not what they haven't.

4. No personal attacks - However, "sledging" style "banter" should be taken with good grace.

5. Anecdotal Evidence - If you have experiences of one thing, please accept that other either may not have or have had opposing experiences. It is likely that neither are invalid.

6. No on likes a whiner - if someone disagrees with you, I suggest you absorb the comments and compose a well thought out rebuttal. Do not whine about how you're being bullied/attacked or similar, it makes for very boring reading.

Further suggestions?

I'll write this up properly once we've had a chance to talk about it.


All the best,

Spare Ed

[naomi24]

What's 'sledging style' banter? I'm not sure I can do that.

[McMouse]

Ed......perhaps you could give guidance on what we should think. The Party line as it were.

[chelle7272]

5. Er what?? lol

[AB Editor]

Hi Naomi: http://en.wikipedia.o...ki/Sledging_(cricket)

Might be worth making these more generic as it is possible they could apply to R&S too.

McMouse, cheer up! No on has told you what to think - just to back it up when writing it down and to consider other's feelings.

Problem Chelle? You'll have to give me a bit more than that.

Spare

[AB Editor]

Very good Vibra.

[naomi24]

Oh, it's a cricketing term. No wonder I didn't recognise it. Thanks spare. :o/

[mike11111]

I think you are going a bit over the top here, Ed. Just two points for now:

1. The rules of debate generally apply to those organisations which wish to embrace the debating rules followed in parliament, and not to what is essentially an easy-going chat site.
2. "Silence is not evidence". Try telling that to a judge.

Yes, I know that some people can become so absorbed that they upset other contributors, but generally speaking most people can rise above that.

I don't want to see a highly-sanitised AB, where's all the fun in that? Am I alone in looking forward to AOG's posts and the responses they usually generate?

[chelle7272]

Ed - it makes sense but doesn't read very well, that's all :-)

[naomi24]

I don't know why Dolores Umbridge is haunting my thoughts .....

[AB Editor]

Why do you think that backing up their arguments and not being aggressive is the same as censorship/sanitization?

Also, suggesting that AB shouldn't have the same rules as parliament AND THEN suggesting I need to talk to a judge about the following point is very funny!

I take your point that the majority rise above the silliness.

Spare

[R1Geezer]

7. Do not post irrelevencies to the argument and take leaps of illogic

8. Tray to acknowldge a valid point even if you don't agree or did not think of it yourself.

[R1Geezer]

9. Do not go on about minor grammatical errors and miss-spellings, they are not an indication that the poster thinks they are correct only that a key was missed, transposed etc whilst hastilty bashing out a response. Unless it's LucyThomas7, obviously, then you can nit pick to death.

[Mick-Talbot]

Don't call people names like .............. well you know, don't you Geezer.

[AB Editor]

I certainly should have thought of no.9 R1G!

I'll add them to the list when it comes to tidying it up

Spare

[anotheoldgit]

/// Do not whine about how you're being bullied/attacked or similar, it makes for very boring reading.///

There should be no need to if your rule 4 is followed.

As being constantly bulled is a constant bore, and stops one's enjoyment of the site.

[jackthehat]

10. Writing a dismissive "End of." at the end of your posts does not confer, upon the writer, the same level of immunity or protection as that afforded by running around a playground shouting "..........and no return/s !".