Who deserves the following debate forum awards?
Most arrogant.
Most insulting.
Most reasonable.
Most aggressive.
Most likely to avoid a true debate.
Most likely to be stubborn in defending their position.
Most courage to intentionally engage in a potentially losing position.
Originally posted by Metal BrainEveryone on the forum at different times.
Who deserves the following debate forum awards?
Most arrogant.
Most insulting.
Most reasonable.
Most aggressive.
Most likely to avoid a true debate.
Most likely to be stubborn in defending their position.
Most courage to intentionally engage in a potentially losing position.
Originally posted by wittywonkaReasonable as willing to accept logic and admit the other person debating has a valid position.
Define this. Reasonable, as in moderate? Or reasonable, as in willing to see the other side of the coin?
People have a tendency to not want to admit they are wrong about something they are debating forcefully. I think we all do it to some extent, but it takes courage to set aside ego and admit it. Far too often people are unwilling to concede and resort to insults on this forum rather than give in to logic. These people take it to the extreme and are very unreasonable.
Originally posted by Metal BrainYour own performance here Thread 145974 page 5 onwards is pretty indicative of the Metal Brain Way; breathless, sloppy, conceited, and totally deceitful, with more deceit and lame personal insults heaped on after being called on it. 😀
Reasonable as willing to accept logic and admit the other person debating has a valid position.
I nominate Terrier jack for most insulting.
FMF and Terrier jack both avoid a true debate. FMF talks in circles and repeats questions already answered and when he takes a position he tries to pretend he didn't afterwards. The "Why is India allowed" thread is a good example of this.
Terrier jack just keeps repeating his insults and will often not even take a position. When he does take a position he just applies mindless labels without merit and never backs it up with anything.
Originally posted by Metal BrainYou seem upset. And rather needy, too.
I nominate Terrier jack for most insulting.
FMF and Terrier jack both avoid a true debate. FMF talks in circles and repeats questions already answered and when he takes a position he tries to pretend he didn't afterwards. The "Why is India allowed" thread is a good example of this.
Terrier jack just keeps repeating his insults and will often not ev ...[text shortened]... a position he just applies mindless labels without merit and never backs it up with anything.
- Joined
- 07 Mar 09
- Moves
- 29170
Originally posted by Metal BrainThanks for letting me know it stings. I'll keep it up.
I nominate Terrier jack for most insulting.
FMF and Terrier jack both avoid a true debate. FMF talks in circles and repeats questions already answered and when he takes a position he tries to pretend he didn't afterwards. The "Why is India allowed" thread is a good example of this.
Terrier jack just keeps repeating his insults and will often not ev ...[text shortened]... a position he just applies mindless labels without merit and never backs it up with anything.
Originally posted by Metal BrainI don't know if I could quantify (or qualify) who does the best job at this.
Reasonable as willing to accept logic and admit the other person debating has a valid position.
But I will say that, with maybe only one or two exceptions, I have found that regular contributors here at RHP with whom I disagree politically still generally practice this philosophy.