(October 9, 2013 at 4:46 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I have absolute say over all rules. I will let you know what they are as we discuss things.
All my pronouncements are final or I win.

Are you sure?

You know, with a more self aware person, I probably wouldn't mind this, as debates take place in a public space and any rules you invent would only reflect poorly on you if they're too unfair, but you aren't self aware at all.

So what I want you to do is, figure out some rules you'd want to play by before we debate. I'm not exactly limiting you, here; any rules you'd come up with during are equally available for you to come up with beforehand, so go nuts. The only reason I can see for your insistence on being able to change the rules of a game in progress, is that you want to wait to see what I argue and then negate it all with specifically spelled out prohibitions during the debate. If this is the case, then of course I'll decline, because that's not a debate, it's you shaking your head. We get enough of that here.

But if your purpose is to have an honest discussion and shape it according to your own desires for it, then there's no reason for you to want it during as well as before. You have full control, so tell me what you want to do. What rules would you employ?

(October 9, 2013 at 4:53 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(October 9, 2013 at 4:46 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I have absolute say over all rules. I will let you know what they are as we discuss things.
All my pronouncements are final or I win.

Are you sure?

You know, with a more self aware person, I probably wouldn't mind this, as debates take place in a public space and any rules you invent would only reflect poorly on you if they're too unfair, but you aren't self aware at all.

So what I want you to do is, figure out some rules you'd want to play by before we debate. I'm not exactly limiting you, here; any rules you'd come up with during are equally available for you to come up with beforehand, so go nuts. The only reason I can see for your insistence on being able to change the rules of a game in progress, is that you want to wait to see what I argue and then negate it all with specifically spelled out prohibitions during the debate. If this is the case, then of course I'll decline, because that's not a debate, it's you shaking your head. We get enough of that here.

But if your purpose is to have an honest discussion and shape it according to your own desires for it, then there's no reason for you to want it during as well as before. You have full control, so tell me what you want to do. What rules would you employ?

I already told you.

(October 9, 2013 at 5:00 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I already told you.

So, to be clear, the rules you want to conduct an official debate under is "I make all the rules, I'll let you know what those rules are, and if you disagree with even one of them, I win." That's honest to god the only thing you're willing to set down before the commencement of an official, structured debate, in the debate area?

That's your idea of an honest discussion on an issue?

(October 9, 2013 at 5:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(October 9, 2013 at 5:00 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: I already told you.

So, to be clear, the rules you want to conduct an official debate under is "I make all the rules, I'll let you know what those rules are, and if you disagree with even one of them, I win." That's honest to god the only thing you're willing to set down before the commencement of an official, structured debate, in the debate area?

That's your idea of an honest discussion on an issue?

Yes or no

(October 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: Yes or no

You know what? Yes.

You gonna choose a topic, or is that going to change mid-debate too?

(October 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:

(October 9, 2013 at 5:03 pm)Esquilax Wrote: So, to be clear, the rules you want to conduct an official debate under is "I make all the rules, I'll let you know what those rules are, and if you disagree with even one of them, I win." That's honest to god the only thing you're willing to set down before the commencement of an official, structured debate, in the debate area?

That's your idea of an honest discussion on an issue?

Yes or no

I can already tell you, as a member of staff, that no official debate will occur here under those terms.

They are completely unreasonable, and if you can't see that, that's your problem.

(October 9, 2013 at 5:08 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(October 9, 2013 at 5:05 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: Yes or no

You know what? Yes.

You gonna choose a topic, or is that going to change mid-debate too?

One topic at a time makes sense.

How about you answer each question from the list of simple questions that was posted for this topic.

Just copy the questions and put your answers in bold next to or below each question.

I just want to see what Atheistic Origin Science has determined yet.

BTW - one other question, on Dawkins' scale where are you.

I would be a 1 because I am convinced that God exists.

(October 9, 2013 at 4:39 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:

(October 9, 2013 at 4:25 pm)Esquilax Wrote: So, what rules would you like to operate under, Grace?

I have absolute say over all rules. I will let you know what they are as we discuss things.
All my pronouncements are final or I win.

I think you've mistaken the term "debate" for "kangaroo court."

(October 9, 2013 at 5:11 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: I can already tell you, as a member of staff, that no official debate will occur here under those terms.

They are completely unreasonable, and if you can't see that, that's your problem.

I kind of had a feeling this might be the case. Sorry Gracie, but you either gotta play fair, or not play at all.

On the other hand, I bent over backwards for you, because I wanted everyone to see the depths you had to stoop to to win in an argument you had no choice but to address. That your tactics here don't come from cogency, well thought out ideas or a reflection of reality, but in being able to pick and choose the things you get to respond to. I started out hoping that you'd accept a real debate so I could sit in that little shooting gallery and pop down your anemic little brain farts until you ran away and everyone else had had a good laugh, but the deeper we got into the mess of what you consider fair play, the more incredulous and willing to play this out I became.

And now, you've all but admitted that you're so lacking in confidence as to your own position that you won't even allow it to come into contact with opposition in a manner you don't completely control. It's just sad.

That said, my offer's still open, if you're willing to act like a human being. I'll even let you choose the topic- we can only have one, this is a structured debate and not a messy melee, them's the rules- and some of the underlying strictures. It's literally the most accommodating I can possibly be; now it's up to you.

I bet that if such a debate were allowed with Gracie controlling all the rules, she'd still lose.