March 18th, 2004 
Official: 1 vs. 1 Debate Rules
[SIZE=4][b][u][color=indigo]One vs. One Debate Rules[/color][/u][/b][/SIZE]
[size=1][color=red]Last Edited: March 19, 2004 by Nykoelle[/color][/size]
Here are the official rules for the new 1 vs. 1 [b]optional[/b] debate style. Basically, it is designed to provide structural debatists with an organized means od debating.
[b][color=firebrick][size=3]Format[/color][/b][/size]
[b][color=purple]First, the challenger descides and posts a detailed topic. [/b][/color]You can challenge a person you know (or have reason to believe) would argue the opposite. You can leave it open to anyone who accepts, but it shouldn't be hanging there for too long.
When preparing a challenge, include rules and assumptions, such as: say you are debating ideals within Christianity. You may want to include the understood assumption that "God does exist." (example provided by Celldss). Include any other special rules, assumptions, etc. Decide on an appropriate number of posts/arguments you wish each side to have. Good ranges are 5-10.
[b][color=purple]Accepting a challenge[/color][/b] is simple. The challenge is granted to the first person to agree to the rules and reply in the thread. Then, after whenever the desided number of prep days pass, the debate begins. NOTE: The debate thread is only for those debating. Comments may be made in a separate thread. Any unrelated comments will be moved.
[b][size=3][color=firebrick]Rules[/size][/color][/b]
[b][u]1.[/u][/b] [b]Ad Hominem is forbidden[/b]. "Ad Hominem" is defined as "Appealing to personal considerations rather than to logic or reason." An example of ad hominem is:
Debatist 1: "We should raise taxes in the US."
Debatist 2: "So you want our already struggling farmers to struggle more?" <- [i]ad hominem[/i]
[b][u]2.[/u][/b] [b]Logic and Reasoning[/b] rules apply. This means that arguments against fallacal statements are somewhat inherent, and do not necessarily need to be debated. If you notice this, you can quietly, through PM to one of the officials (currently, me, GoM, and nykoelle are working on this) that it has happened and a ruling will be made. An example is:
Police Officer: "Johnny committed the murder, didn't he!"
Witness: "No, Johnny is a good-hearted person who would never do that!"
Police Officer: "Yeah, well, would a good-hearted person kill a young woman?" <- [i]circular logic[/i] (evidence given for a proposition contains the proposition itself)
[b][u]3.[/u][/b] [b]No flaming or personal attacks whatsoever.[/b]
[b][u]4.[/u][/b] [b]Do not incite personal attacks (do not troll).[/b]
[b][u]5.[/u][/b] [b]Do not imply[/b] that an opponent meant something specific besides what they said. Do not put words in people's mouths.
[b][u]6.[/u][/b] [b]Sources.[/b] You must include sources. A good place is at the bottom of your post, with links to websites, names of books, movies, etc. Both debaters must be able to see these sources.
[b][u]7.[/u][/b] Sources should [b]not be questioned[/b]. If a person quotes encyclopedia brittanica, for example, there is no need to question that source's source.
[b][u]8.[/u] Post a 'preparation' period[/b]. A certain amount of days, say, 4, should be specified to pass for 'preparation' time after a challenger accepts. After this time, the debates begin.
[b][u]10.[/u] Judges will not be allowed to interact[/b] with the participants regarding the debate. Judges will be agreed upon before the debate begins. Both debators have to agree on the judge(s). Judges may volunteer by posting in the thread.
[b][u]11.[/u][/b][b]Assumptions are stated at the beginning by the challenger.[/b] For example, if the topic is "God's Existance" the challenger will state whether its asummed he does or does not. In other words, your assumption is somewhat like your stance. This should be made clear, since to win the debate, the person that accepts the challenge would have to prove this assumption wrong.
[b][u]12.[/u][/b] [b]ALL POSTS MUST ABIDE BY THE [url=http://www.tutorialforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=65920]DEBATE GUIDELINES[/URL][/b]
[b][color=firebrick][size=3]Suggested Guidelines[/color][/b][/size]
1. Don't make your replies too long. They can weaken and lose their feeling.
2. Don't be afraid of being wrong on a few points. Sometimes, people are wrong. It's okay to accept a few small losses, if you still feel you have a strong argument anyhow.
3. When you have been proven wrong, don't deny it. Just accept it.
4. Just remember: If a person declines a challenge, or concedes a debate, or loses, it doesn't say anything about them as a person. It doesn't make them a coward or mean that their argument is weak.
At the end of a debate, the judge(s) will decide on a winner objectively, and post their result.
Have fun, keep it clean. And if you have any suggestions for changes in these rules, PM a Mentor.
___________________
I did the atkins diet for only two weeks, and I lost 14 days!
"Decker, your sig still.." rocks
Love, Phil
Last edited by nykoelle, March 20th, 2004 03:42 AM (Edited 1 times)
