DEBATE-ing on Higher-Fire

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

[Disclaimer: Kinda long...but suggestions are at the end!]

[Bro. Jerry]
>>NEW QUESTION FOR ALL WHO SUPPORT WOMEN PREACHERS/PASTORS:
>>
>>BOTTOM LINE:

<snip>


[Bro. Tyler]
>O.k..... this is the *kind* of thing that I don't like about some of these
>really hot topics.... nothing ever gets answered.


[Anneliese]
Or only gets "answered" by another question which loses the meaning of the
original question and frustrates the situation rather than enlightens
things.

>To that end, Bro Kirk and I (Bro Tyler), have thought that we need to come
>up with rules of operation of a real live e-mail debate.  Form teams,
>elect captains, establish rules, etc.

Great idea...so we should post to the appointed "captain" only and not post
replies to the list? (curious - alternate suggestion below)

>There'll be questions established, further points can't be made until
>previous questions are answered.... hopefully, a real debate will ensue.


We need to do something about the emotional involvement factor.  Even with
my limited experience in debate, emotion will only undermine your position
because others will react *first* to the anger/fear/upset, *then* to the
actual point that was being made (if at all).  Perhaps this is why so much
material in these long posts (obviously put together with great work
involved) is not responded to.  It is either A) the emotional (80% of
hypoth. post) is ignored; or B) the emotion clouds the real point; or C) the
responder is trying to stem the emotion first and due to this tangent, the
original point is lost.

[Disclaimer: the following was more or less brainstorming...<g>]
Perhaps we should try something else ... ask that those debating "change
sides" for a while and argue *for* the opposing viewpoint.  I daresay this
gets done already (but those doing it are keeping it a secret!).  It does us
all good to be challenged.  I remember reading "To Kill a Mockingbird" where
Atticus gives Scout the excellent advice to "walk around in someone else's
shoes" for a while.

Also...when the debate ensues, it may involve more than just two "camps".
Such as the most recent "Women Preacher" debate.  (To name a few) there are
views that oppose it absolutely, views that believe in ecclesiastical
limitation/permission (and splits within that view), views that believe in
cultural/sociological limitation/permission, and views that believe in
complete permission.

Perhaps we can include "key words" in the subject line rather than have
"captains".
EXAMPLE:
All posts *supporting* "View A: Women=No Spiritual Authority" will ONLY post
to that subject line
All posts *supporting* "View B: Women=Forbidden in Past, Permitted in
Present" will ONLY post to that subject line
** [As opposed to posting an *opposing* view within "View A"s territory.
Likewise, all posts *supporting* "View C: Women=Forbidden at Home, Permitted
w/ Church" will ONLY post to that subject line.

Do you follow what I mean?
Material may be "Cut N Pasted" from opposing views, but the actual *replies*
would remain within the "campsite".  Others would be "zapped" and reminded
to "post within their own camp"!!! <g>
This would make it easier for the casual observer to view all of the points
for one "side" in one condensed "chunk" rather than spread out among a
zillion replies (especially if their email is organized by subject).
When there are different Debates, the subjects could read (for example):
"Db.1:Vw.A: WP..." (pertaining to Debate #1:Veiwpoint A: Women Preachers)
"Db.2:Vw.A: Tth..." (pertaining to Debate #2:Viewpoint A: Tithing)
"Db.3:Vw.A: DwC..." (pertaining to Debate #3:Viewpoint A: Apostolic Dialogue
w/ Catholics)
This method makes the line itself much shorter and easier to read.
Responders would repeat the main subject (long form) at the top of their
posts (for the sake of newbies or people browsing archives)

I think this would stem some of the "emotion factor" and personal attacks
because anything posted would reflect that whole "side" (and everyone in
agreement).  Peer pressure can be a good thing.


Just rambling...but feedback would be appreciated <g>
Anneliese