This feels like something from The Boys; like Homelander banning memes about him.
This feels like something from The Boys; like Homelander banning memes about him.
The man gave us world peace, it's the least they could do!
What are you some type of liberal snowflake who opposes hard earned participation trophies?!
/satire
Don't forget Star Wars, he won, by being the greatest Liver King Jedi of all time!
My ~ 10,000 word response just got deleted
Seriously, write in Word (or a text editor of your choice), and copy/paste it into the text boxes here.
Not only will it not delete itself (as often), but it'll help minimize errors.
But we need the year for... Reasons...
Also what was the name of your childhood dog? And what street did you... (for the love of God, no one take this seriously...)
Merry Christmas (or preferred holiday, for me Kingsmas!) everyone!
It's been quite awhile, but there's been some good updates to the CoC draft (mainly to include the results of the AI discussion, but also lots of other feedback). It'll never be Rules Lawyer proof, but I hope it won't have any significant problems for anyone not intentionally trying to misread it.
So I was writing an article on the hellhole that is Texas, when I noticed Google's AI summary now claims key parts of the 14th amendment (life, liberty, property) now only applies to citizens (in spite the literal words being "person")... This sparked a little something in my head...
The excuse for ICE to deport people without due process, is chiefly that due process only applies to citizens, not to people in general...
Paradoxically, the same people who support ICE, are usually the same people who oppose abortion often citing issues of due process (the right to life, liberty, property being inherent, rather than something special for citizens).
So, would anyone here care to explain how this seeming contradiction works? My best guess is that personhood expires at the moment of birth, but I don't want to put words in someone else's mouth.
Considering that specific, explicit threats of violence can potentially earn you a visit from an armored van, or even a prison sentence, I think this should incur a harsher penalty than a one-month ban.
I believe that one was decided democratically. But someone will inevitably make one either significantly more severe, or do it in repetition, which will net an perma-ban.
Comparing this Code of Conduct to the one from DebateArt, it seems to me like you are going for a much, much, much more laissez-faire approach here.
That is my understanding as well. We're trying to better give people what they want. We of course can't cater to everyone, but we can try to make an inviting place for intellectual discussions.
A lot of people have broad hostility towards identify groups...
"Broad" was indeed not the best word choice. I'll update that to make it less ambiguous. The gist is this isn't a safe space for bigots who are constantly hating on people for the condition of their birth.
Seems odd to imply that any insults are not okay and then say later on that insults do not merit moderator intervention.
I'll clarify that. I had "in isolation" but not also specifying one offs or rare occurrences.
Someone asks me why Bob and I aren't talking, and I dismissively say "Bob's an idiot." It's too minor to be likely to benefit from outsiders getting involved in an official capacity. Now if I go thread to thread proclaiming that wherever he posts, the isolated insult is not what mods intervene against, but rather the clear pattern of targeted harassment.
Other than that it seems good. Also made me chuckle a few times.
Glad to hear that!
If anyone would like to offer feedback to the current draft of the CoC, it may be found at:
https://debate.miraheze.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct
We're quite open to changes, or even complete overhauls if anyone has a better idea for how it should be structured (if anyone opts for that, I would advise creating another page in that wiki for the alternative).
...he must have enjoyed getting bitch slapped.
Maybe she threated to withhold intimacy, that would do it.
Maybe she threated to withhold the slaps?
A couple more.
1. It's be great to be to able to further indent quotations.
Person A's talk
Person B's response to it.
2. It'd be nice to be able to clear notifications.
An additional point about AIs, is they are not longer something one must go out of their way to utilize. A standard Google search is now enhanced by AI. Type a phrase you're trying to remember into Google, and it'll give you an AI Overview about it. Trying find a good source to support your stance, you'll almost certainly be guided by an AI assistant even if unintended. Which pretty much means any time someone is using any sources, they're being contaminated by AIs.
Granted, AI is still stupid, routinely following into the trap of Paradoxical Premises. Ask it about the gender of the yellow Power Ranger, and it'll both insist they were not trans, while explaining in great detail how they were trans. Same with Marines eating Crayons, since they both would absolutely under any circumstances never eat crayons, but also here's why they eat crayons... Unfortunately, this isn't a surefire way to spot AI writing, since it literally got that way by copying people making the same fallacy.
> I think it would be fruitless to have any ban on AI research assistance, since how would it be identified?
Every day, a murderer walks free because they hid the evidence and shut up when the cops came. Why have a law against murder?
That's a fine example of false equivalence.
In the case of the murder in addition to causing massive harm, they create a trail of evidence, no matter how well some may cover it up. Whereas simple research, falls more into the category of a witch hunt against thought crime to which it's impossible for someone to prove their innocence.
Getting deeper, the person accused of murder can prove their innocence. For starters, they could bring the alleged murder victim to the court house to verify they were never murdered. Whereas the person accused of having talked to an AI, not having an AI write their case but just having talked to the AI, has no means to disprove it the accusation.
I think it would be fruitless to have any ban on AI research assistance, since how would it be identified?
Uncredited copy/pasting paragraphs written by another, to me will always be plagiarism. I think having the voting policy treat it that way, to allow voters to punish it, may be optimal.
On a related note, I've seen arguments in favor of plagiarism; the one bit that resonated with me is a benifit to groundwork. To which ends, if someone has a detailed description written by AI, I will personally not care.
...
As for AI written votes... I've never considered it, but I'd say loss of voting privileges.
...
A key problem to remind people of is AI likes to fill in the blanks; ask it to summarize a debate in which only one side offered a topical argument, and it will frequently invent the argument the other side should have made (literally had one of those wiki pages suffer that). So AI arguments and votes are usually going to be lengthy gibberish.
That could be included in pronouns if they so choose.
Translate, please:
Pretty sure that's the IKEA instructions for assembling a bookshelf.
I'm going to third that one. I literally came on here right now to post much the same...
A fairly good way to do it would be to have that top line be shaded like the pro and con above. I'd probably have it give a little more information as well, such as starting with which side they're on before their user name, and (I do believe in this for the forums as well) have an optional pronouns included in there (I'd of course add this into profiles so that it can be referenced for such things).
How can Trump be awarded the Nobel Peace prize when he is causing such turmoil in his own country.
But what about Bill Clinton?!
/satire... I know it's a direct quote, but how it was ever anything but satire is one of the greatest mysteries of our time.
An idea I’ve had before is a supplemental list of best debates by subject.
While the HoF is a fun tradition, containing some amazing entries, it being about popularity has also lead to some subpar entries.
If a new user were browsing the site and looked at the HoF thread, I’d rather they see a periodically updated curated list at the start of it, which assures we have our best foot forward.
To such ends, I believe the HoF thread should be organized with the following posts: