|
|
|
|
This time, a thread is featured, whose initiator has in fact removed his initiating post and those of his that followed. Still, Bobby has by intent or by accident, sparked a debate that has been quite energetic. Essentially he asserted that a certain misunderstood vocation was imbued with characteristics that gave it license and justification unlike almost any other. The ‘License to Kill’ of which a Sniper is the owner.
Now this has spurred discussion of the gradations of killing that do or do not exist between Snipers and Assassins and whether they are in fact different at all. Further, where does there exist a boundary between doing the ostensibly justifiable killing of certain persons and the unjustifiable act of murder ? Whose authority gives true license to kill and by so doing erases all personal responsibility in the choice or execution of this profession ? What kind of life is forfeit with moral impunity and when ? Who chooses and what is their moral authority to do so ? What kind of human being obeys ? And which orders, and under what conditions when given, does human decency demand that such orders be disobeyed with prejudice ?
A very serious debate with deeply sincere opinions expressed. Read and gain depth with this potent thread of discussion right HERE, then add your own intelligent logic and comments as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What would Debate be without ideas for change? Aldric-Eoml-Treschi discusses the pros and cons of legalizing a dubious, although 'victimless' crime. Prostitution.
Practical points are raised on both sides of the discussion. On one hand, the women - and men - employed this way are seen as lower-class, shunned for their occupation. On another, it is argued that when prostitution is legalized, its frequency will increase; but even this can be a good thing, as legal jobs can be taxed and safety standards imposed. Even the 'victim' aspect is examined from the points of view of the employees, and their children.
Do you have a point to make? An idea, or a clarification? A relevant personal experience? Post here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This week’s featured debate is actually a double header. Two sides of the same coin.
It begins:
…with Maus MerryJest positing that as no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) have been found, that the entire justification for the war in Iraq was perhaps actually a sham by intent. The argument moves into a discussion of the known occasions when the Saddam administration used WMDs. Further points are made that with the evidence of actual use, misuse and abuse of such tools of destruction, the likelihood that they are gone is slim. This being further amplified by the fact that the Saddam government could provide no credible paper trail for the destruction of stockpiles once known to exist. Others argued that since nothing has been found, the weapons either had been destroyed, never existed, or perhaps had been transported out of Iraq. Read and comment on this thread here.
On the other hand:
…Jadem Cog points out some news which has only just begun to see some light in a variety of press outlets. The news relates that Danish military units in Iraq have just uncovered Geneva Convention prohibited weapons concealed inside road construction. Specifically blister gas weapons. Some contend that these weapons are too old to be considered, while others argue that they are what they are. While this is the first discovery of this kind to be publicly reported, will it be the last ? It is often said that where there is smoke, there is fire. But how much smoke must there be before the disbeliever will call a fire a fire ? Read and add your opinion to this side of the argument here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under the thread Title: Question for Liberals, Pentagon John bravely poses a question, asking those who are willing to explain to him: What's wrong with inheriting money? Is it somehow "unfair"?
The ensuing discussion can hardly be described as for the faint of heart, for Pentagon John finds the advocates of higher taxation of the rich amassed against him. On one side are arrayed those who feel that beyond a certain nebulous amount, the well to do have more money than they need and it should be subject to confiscation. Pentagon John, on the other hand objects to this entire mindset of folks deciding that it is just to punish some for their good fortune, or for passing that good fortune on to their progeny.
Some feel that work is good for the soul and that those who have not worked for it are not worthy of respect, others state that the needs of the poorest justify the confiscation of assets from the most successful.
Some also remind that government is not some magically divine entity that divides and allocates resources wisely, but in fact often squanders them in inefficiency, the building of bureaucratic fiefdoms and pork barrel projects. Hardy likely to encourage confidence.
Since wealth earned the first time has generally already been fully taxed once, is not the money owned thereafter the property of the earner to do with as suits them ? Whether to spend on gratuitous self indulgence, keep it, burn it, give it to charity or the government or God forbid, the children ? Or should the government find ways to confiscate as much as possible for all the myriad spending programs that it has on its platter ? Where do you come down in this ? Care to add your opinion on inheritance taxes ? Step up to the plate right here and pitch your own solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quaidis asks an interesting question based on the multiplicity of forms seen within the category of Anthro-Avatars, specifically: "Are Neko-jin's Really Anthro?"
The point in particular that Quaidis is interested in, notes that certain Avatars seem to be people merely with animal ears, tails or such like tacked on. Do these fall within the definition of Anthro, or not, and in either case, why ?
With the range of Avatars being so variable in the Dream, this topic is of wide interest, and folks began responding quickly. Addressing among other subjects; What defines anthropomorphism ? Discussion has moved towards this meaning; non-human beings with human features. But further discourse extends beyond just those of human like physical features to such human characteristics as mind or personality.
Likewise the point has been made that perhaps some Avatars may be more correctly considered zoomorphic; as being humans with animal characteristics. Further discussion also includes consideration of which types of Avatars are zoomorphic and which are anthropomorphic or possibly even both.
But have the correct conclusions been reached ? Is there more than meets the eye here ? Can Avatars bearing human and non-human characteristics be properly grouped into either zoomorphs or anthropomorphs or are these definitions appropriate ? Want to delve into this topic ? Think the conclusions are a bunch of bunkum ? In fact even if one accepts the Zoomorph/Anthropomorph paradigm, how can one know for certain, which is the correct definition of any given Avatar ? Join in the discussion here and do your part to broaden our minds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now I done spend a lotta time lookin' at this here "big board" o' mine browsin' this ol' Internet. I bin usin' that fine tool by a certain Mr. Gates known as the "Internet Explorer". But I bin hearin' some folks out there sayin' that this ain't the best way to be a seein' what I bin a seein'. I reckon I don't know what these folks are talkin' 'bout with their Opera's and Mozilla's and whatnot.
But y'all can read all about it in
The Ever-infamous Browser Flame War
Now this here DEBATE has some very real practical implications. If ain't bin viewin' the web rightly, I wants ta know!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cobra has noticed something which has given him pause to ask: "Why Are Furries So Indignant ?" What he refers to is the sensitivity that furries have to criticism as found around the web and how they are presented in the various offline media. He gives the example of how angrily furries respond to the lambasting they are given on the POE (Portal Of Evil) Web Page. By comparison he suggests that other fandoms just do not seem to be as sensitive to ridicule.
Cobra closes by asking why is it that furries seem to feel their treatment is some sort of racisim and why is their response so intense ?
An interesting topic, that certainly is worthy of contemplation. Do furries feel that they are revealing a part of themselves over which they are particularly sensitive ? Do these attacks and misrepresentations by the media seem personal affronts ? Will such treatment continue indefinitely or will the public eventually find it sufficiently boring that the media moves on to other fresher subjects ? How much do the vitriolic reactions of the furries exacerbate the problem by giving the detractors an entertaining response ?
Add your own voice to the discussion and perhaps reveal an angle the has yet been missed right here !
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Orcist Rayner relates to the forum his inclination to play "The Devils Advocate" on some occasions when he sees the need, despite the opinions of his friends and associates. He explains how this sometimes results in bad feelings, for his having argued one or another positions, in his effort just to see the exchange of ideas improved, or when one debater is standing alone.
Should persons be disliked for taking or arguing unpopular positions ? How much can be really assumed about a person’s personal position based upon arguments put forth ? Should it even matter outside of the Debate Forum ? Isn’t it better that a Debate really be an exchange rather than just a shouting match ?
Many thoughtful opinions have been shared here. Do you have a slant on this that has been missed ? Or the need to step in and clarify something that you find unclear ? Click right in and do so in ’The Devil’s Advocate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inquiring minds want to know, as Benor himself asks; Are we trigger happy ? He explains his concern that perhaps blaming undesired results in RP on ‘powergaming’ may be a frequent and perhaps too convenient scapegoat. In all fairness, Benor asks, shouldn’t we think about it carefully before we accuse someone of powergaming, when really it is just that we have been frustrated in some action.
Further, he reminds us that sometimes what may seem powergaming, has been given approval by the GM of an RP before it was undertaken. Until we have a more clear idea of the actual facts and better perspective, doesn’t it make sense to inquire of the GM and of the presumably offending party, before we jump to our conclusions ?
If a player feels unfairly blamed for such so called powergaming, what is the most appropriate way to respond ?
There are many shades of the application of Avatar influences in the day to day progress of RPs. How do you judge the actions of others, and defend your own ? When is powergaming truly powergaming, and when is it just sour grapes ? Join us in the Debate thread; Being 'trigger happy' to learn what other players think about this, and to contribute your own feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quaidis asks a question close the heart. In fact it is two questions rolled into one.
Firstly, what does it really take to be considered an artist ? Should a person's talent and success be the sole determinant ? Are documents attesting to the certifiable completion of various art courses the real path to validation, regardless of talent or lack thereof ? When is one an artist, and when simply a hobbyist, or should that matter ?
Secondarily, what qualifies a person to advise or critique art ? Is anyone good enough, or are only other artists allowed ? How much must one know and understand about art for ones opinion to matter ?
Participants in this thread have already stated a complex combination of thoughts and feelings on the subject: That some artists are magnificent without formal training, while others only excell with the extra boost that it provides. That indeed some hardly benefit at all, and a few seem unable to learn artistic skills regardless. There does seem to be consensus that with or without classes, one must regularly work at growth in ones art skills, to in fact do so. Further it is pointed out that the critiques and suggestions for art can be valid from many sources, both knowledgeable and naive about art, for one never knows whose eye will spot and identify the problem that others could not. And not to forget, if one seeks to sell ones art, sometimes at least, the buyer becomes king after all.
Have some experiences of your own on this topic ? Have an opinion burning to be shared, or an interest in knowing what others think ? Then enter the discussion Artists Without Classes Suck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Learna inquires: " Are signatures perhaps overused ?" and then expounds on her question to describe what she has issues with in posts. Mainly a concern about signatures that are huge beneath tiny posts, or which are using the same image endlessly in a fast debate when a given Avatar is posting repeatedly. She believes, once is enough in a thread. Not that she does not like the lovely art, but must she scroll past the same image over and over and over ?
Debaters suggest that perhaps it might be nice if signatures where shortened and images be reduced in size. Others remind us that for folks with slow connections large signatures slow the loading of pages. Now admittedly one can turn signatures off, but sometimes the huge images are in the body of the post and shutting off signatures has no effect.
Many remark that they may use no signature at all on some occasions. Some recall the signature reduction drive from some time back and suggest that another one might be in order. But it is reminded that one member's reasonable signature is another person's long one. Where do you stand on this issue ? Signatures personalize posts in ways pleasing to both some readers and some posters, but displeasing to others.
Care to read the discussion and add your own spin to the mix ? Then come join "Are Signatures Overused ?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sha Dao Shai has found himself pondering a question central to human societies going back into the dim times of prehistory: "Where Does Morality Come From ?" he wonders. He frames his question under the following conditions: There is no God. There is no religion. With life only defined by the needs to reproduce, he reminds that even atheists follow some fashion of moral code. He wonders, where do humans find this code, how ?
Has an inner compass been burned or hard wired into our genes by natural selection ? And if we go by a ‘Golden Rule’, why do we do so ? If our morality comes from upbringing, from whence did the source or code of this trained morality come ? If morality does not come from deity, what motivates it to come from the heart or the intellect ? Are the complex socialogical ties that form among humans the skein or network within which the practicalities of morality are worked out and codified, a sort of non genetic evolution ? Or is there a concurrency of both social and genetic development that is inextricably intertwined ?
And what indeed constitutes a better society as opposed to a worse one ? That one society can survive while smothering or overpowering another, or is it something more ? By what standard does one measure the improvement or degradation of the human condition or quality of life, on the basis of this moral code ? At the confluence of Plato’s spirit, appetite and rationality: what kind of society results ? Is fulfillment always the true goal of these moral codes, or only sometimes ? Is it the outgrowth of a social contract which might or might not fulfill individuals, but which serves to create cohesive and functional groups of individuals who share the common bond of a standardized rule set ?
In fact is there perhaps an underlying selfishness that drives morality, however it is wrapped in philosophy and flowery oration ? It is the basis of every society. Do you have an opinion ? Or are you interested in the opinions of those debating it here ? Trying to formulate your own moral code ? Come, join the debate in: "Where Does Morality Come From ?".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shishi Osa’s PG is having to make some decisions. In his own words:
"This is not a political debate, nor is it a major world crisis issue. Just a big deal in my home."
He asks us to look at some photography of himself and makes a few self disparaging comments. And then asks for our help in making a decision. To whit:
"And now the topic, you've seen my hideous face both with and without a moustache. Which one should it be? I currently have it, even thought that's the older picture of the two, should it stay or go? Let me know!"
Thereafter follows a discourse on the pros and cons of lip hair on men. Included are the simple statements by many of their preferences according to their personal feelings on the issue. But also included is the discussion of moustache styles and the virtues and problems that go with them. To some small degree this has also gotten into a discussion of the problems and advantages of both goatees, full beards and even mutton chops. While this debate may not be of earthshaking import, it is still causing controversy in the household of one respected member of this community. You can help, you can contribute. Just enter the debate and read the opinions and provide your generous assistance to Shishi Osa by offering your own ideas and suggestions here !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zell asks Should I Even Bother ? Bother what ? To register to vote absentee, this year in the first Presidential Election in which he is old enough to be permitted to cast a vote. Zell feels however, due to perceptions with respect to the state in which he votes, that his vote will have no meaning. And add to this the fact that being out of the country ( In New Zealand ) he will have to complete paperwork which he has described as being complicated, adds to his sense of wasted effort.
If all the drops of water, which make the sea, were to be compared to votes, then any individual drop surely seems to be of no importance and significance. And yet, all the water of all the seas on Earth can be reduced to a measure of mere drops, but look how together, nothing can stand against the tides and rages of those seas. Together, the might of all those drops is nearly immeasurable and irresistible.
It is only one vote. But how important is it that Zell or anyone should be heard, and express their opinion via the ballot box ? How much trouble is too much to participate in the system as it is, that decides who shall have the power to do what ? What recommendation, do you have to offer to Zell ? Just come share your opinion and position on this timely topic: "Should I Even Bother ?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a simple seeming question the Mercutio asks. And to quote the opening post in its entirety, he simply states:
"(Well, what does? What makes a character deep? Memorable? Three-dimensional and all that?
In this case, I'm leaning towards avatars, not characters from cartoons, books, comics, etc.)"
It seems at face value to be a simple question, but as Candylegs asserts, perhaps it is in fact quite a broad one. None the less, as the ensuing discussion reveals, it is a worthy one and apropos to the Napping Cat’s Dream. Reteo, believes it involves the depth of a character’s background and how faithfully one plays to that, while Ceera suggests we should consider how an avatar would respond and why this would be the case. Amethyst finds that style and quality of a post is important, and that perfunctory posting is often not helpful.
Of course these posts are much more informative than just their highlights and many more folks a sharing their considerations for creating characters of depth. Care to see how others make their Avatars more interesting and solid ? Desire to add to our knowledge with your ideas on this subject ? It is no more than a click away in the discussion of: What makes a character deep ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pentagon John has asked a question for which there is not necessarily an easy answer. Now frankly this is a debate which has been waxing at times rather hot as emotions flare and folks declare their positions and thoughts. But despite the heat, the exchanges have been intellectually stimulating and the topic certainly has proven itself worthy of discussion. The challenge is trying to determine what has proven to be a nebulous boundary. When is the death of a child as a consequence of the murder of the mother, also murder, and when is it not ? Is the personhood the only determining factor of the sanctity of an unborn human life ? And if so, when does personhood begin ? And if personhood is not the determining factor, what is ? This is an argument that societies worldwide face and solve in different fashions. Will law decide alone what is the answer ? If so, how does the law arrive at that answer ? Will medicine decide what the boundary is, and in that case how so ? In fact, do not all turn to philosophy and the discussion of societal ethics to attempt to zero in on solutions which societies can live with without tearing themselves apart ? If you wish to appreciate the passion and thoughts of these debaters, and perhaps offer your own thoughts to broaden our minds, then simply come to the Debate in: The Baby's Murder Was Inadvertent!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thalamasa opens an interesting discussion on the pros and cons of the Minimum Wage Laws as: "Abolish...minimum wages?" Proceeding to illustrate her points via metaphor and fingerpuppets, she describes a variety of possible reactions and results to higher versus lower minimum wages. What ensues is a discussion of wages, outsourcing and minimum funds required for the most basic acceptable living standards. The exchanges are enthusiastic and the ideas put forward are engaging and informative.
If the money that a person earns or ought to earn for their effort put forth in the economic system is of interest, then perhaps you might care to read, analyze and share your own thoughts in Abolish...minimum wages?
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Kerssido PG asks a question with the assertion: "Sucks, because it's not Japanese!". Elaborating, she states that some folks seem to have an obsession with everything Japanese. And her question is not an unfair one. Many folks do appear to believe that a lot of Japanese entertainment products are better than those produced in say, the United States, and perhaps elsewhere as well. But The Kerssido PG wants to know, are American animated films and comics that bad ? And if that is so, are they all bad ?
While tastes may vary, the differences in style and even permissible content in a given country can affect the final nature of an entertainment product. Subjects perhaps considered just fine for a comic in one region, may be vigorously frowned upon in another. Some parts of the world are perfectly content to look upon animation and comics as an adult form of entertainment, when elsewhere it is thought to be little more than kid stuff. Does this also suggest that in a nation that claims to guarantee freedom of speech, the facts prove it to be a popular myth ? Is the love of Japanese Anime and Manga then a rebellion against the truth of the situation and a product of a yearning to be free of such smothering constraints ?
This exchange of ideas is interesting. Have your own spin on this subject ? Interested in how others feel about the comparative popularity of the Japanese and American products ? Care to learn about some products of this sort that are from neither of these nations ? Then just click here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erica has a question about Myth Based Characters. You see, she wants to create a character based somewhat upon the poem "The Cremation of Sam McGee" by the famous poet Robert W. Service. She notes that the work by Service is now public domain and that the tale has evolved into somewhat of a portion of popular folklore. What Erica wants to know, is if making such a character in both specific and general terms, is a ‘bright idea’. Respondents are concerned about the concepts of plagiarism and others about originality. Some even to the point of wondering why anyone would wish to play a character from an established mythology ? Others feel that bringing mythological concept character’s to life is entertaining and fun. Others point out that no matter that an Avatar idea may come from mythology, the potential for originality remains, and in fact may well be pretty well inescapable in realistic terms. Examples of existing successful Avatars, which are themselves based upon mythology and are pointed out and discussed. So, how do you feel about Avatars being based upon mythological characters ? Come on in, see how others feel and think, and share your views to in Myth Based Characters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maagra Echak Raymaak asks in straightforward fashion; are taxes moral, immoral, not able to be measured morally, a duty, a debt, or necessary at all. While this Debate has quickly been somewhat dominated by Demon Prince Orias and Pentagon John, and there does appear to be some genuine personal acrimony between them, there are a plethora of interesting points being made. Some folks have found the motivation to enter their own opinions into this discussion, and all are welcome to do so. But even if you do not have the intestinal fortitude to enter the fray yourself, you certainly will find the topic interesting and entertaining. So, to explore the ideas presented, or add your own, just click on: TAXES: Moral, Immoral, Amoral, a Duty, a Debt, Necessary?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, hey.
The Thread In Question
I get to start off with a little DEBATE self-mockery. I've found some of my own posts in here! Have you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada and Denmark issue appears to be something about a rock in Greenland the Canucks and Hamletians are arguing about.
Yahoo: Civilized Warfare Through Google Ads
Washington Times Article
CBC News
ABC News
And FOX News's search doesn't reveal anything on this.
-------------------------------------------------------
In more internet-based news, apparently Yahoo shut down all its user-created chat rooms at some point because pedophiles were using it.
Wired News
Washington Post
CNET News
Edit: FOX News /does/ have something on this.
FOX News
Yes, I'm human. If I screw up, PM me or use some other magical mystical mojomuscular way of contacting me or some such.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Something That Might Be Of Value
What we have here is a bit of a discussion as to whether it is better to invest money into corporation incentives, or to spend the money on education and the like instead, the idea being that corporations will prefer employees who've (presumably) been better educated and won't get ill as often (presumably because of the money spent on health care). Zell's using Toyota as his model case.
-----------------
In unrelated news, some fanciful Japanese fellows have gone and made a female android.
Japanese Develop Female Android
You might care about this, especially because they stress that it'll be soon difficult to distinguish robots from humans. Or some such. Or you might see potential future uses for the female android. I dunno.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because you're not cool enough to scroll down
Nasa's killed about 14 people in space flights!
The Russians are space experts!
Capitalist Pen vs Communist Pencil, in some sort of climactic battle. I dunno. These folk seem to be into reusing and not reusing space vehicles or something.
----------------------------------------------
http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-08-19-voa18.cfm
Hey, Israel's evacuating some Palestinian land! Things are starting to move! ....again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measure of a Religion
So, we return to an example of an illustrious fellow, Pat Robinson, who has openly proclaimed the benefits of the assassination of the Venezuelan president. Apparently, this isn't the first time.
But, the hilarity of Christian fundies isn't our intention today: Zell wants to produce some sort of system wherein to weigh the relative value of religions, to see if one's better than the other.
I think we already know which religion is the best.
(And to go completely E/N on you guys, 2000th post.  )
|
|
|
|
Reply Main
New Thread
Flat
Threaded
Edit
Quote
