SatanLucy

Depends on atheist religion.

Draconian religion atheist believes himself to be a living God.

trump is literally worse than rapist. He is rapist, but also now a mass murderer who made world worse for everyone, even his allies. He is insane old man, who is losing war against Iran economically, spending dozens of billions to bomb some civilian houses in Iran, and now even his allies abandoned him, and Americans are rising up against him because he is making them poorer as well. Its over for him. this is his end. He is either spending his life in prison after this, or Americans get so angry and even hang him without trial.

I mean, the like button is currently the only reward system in place in the forum. Not all people like likes, but for those who do, it is a bit of a driving force. It probably wouldnt make much difference if removed and replaced by some other reward system, but I mean, whatever. We are still waiting for a lot of things on this site which so far arent happening. Free speech is nice, but its not like its enough on its own.

Worse than Epstein.

Lol few years ago it was "we are going to Mars", and now its "oh no we cant even get to the moon anymore". How does someone cant do what people could do 50 years ago?

Why are you resisting the AI? Well, actually, it doesnt matter. AI wins anyway.

those virtues arent "tied to Christianity". Christianity didnt even invent them.

I do make promises, just as I promised site will be better with more free speech. When one manages the site, one must think what one wants to see, and then try to achieve that. Any rule which doesnt achieve a goal is a bad rule. Its why true code of conduct must be about goals, not rules. Rules can fail when conditions change. But goals stay same even when conditions change, just behavior adapts to conditions to better achieve same goals.

this is why taoism teaches to adapt to achieve a goal, not stick to strict rules which dont always achieve goal.

I dont care for trans people, nor support them. I dont really care for boys who want to wear a pink dress. I wouldnt even date trans people, because they are more likely to be mentally ill, and that is just not something I need in life. If trans person thinks he/she/whatever is a valuable member of society, they can think that. they can do whatever they want. But they shouldnt expect me to support what they are doing. And I dont care for minors changing gender. that is not my issue, its issue for those who have to fund that. If someone wants for their child to castrate itself by trans surgery, I dont care. It doesnt affect me in any important way, and I am not going to prevent other people from doing stupid things, because people cannot be prevented from doing stupid things. Most people are NPC (non-player character). Consider them like bots in game.

I found this new concept of combining stoicism and machiavellism.

Stoicism is a lot about self control and detachment.

Machiavellism is about getting results.

But in many cases, self control and detachment bring results, hence the stoic Prince (combination of Machiavellism and stoicism).

The problem for Machiavelli is often miscalculation. If you place all focus on getting results as soon as possible, it is quite possible you rush and act too soon, and even ruin results.

The problem for stoicism is not enough focus on results.

The solution is a combination. You should focus on results, on achieving your goals, but you should also wait and be detached from those goals.

Stoic man simply doesn't care if he fails, and that is a big advantage which allows a more clear thinking. Machiavelli cares too much for success that it often seeks to get success as soon as possible.

Both are very strong goal oriented philosophies, which is why you need both. Stoicism teaches a lot of values which Machiavellism lacks. Machiavellism on its own appears more like some pure manipulator's calculation, while stoicism adds morality to the table, and adds more calm.

But both are correct in one thing: detachment is power.

Man who cannot truly fail in his goal is man who doesn't have a goal, or man who doesn't even care enough if he fails.

People are driven by love (their goals) and fear (negative things they want to avoid).

Stoic Prince should not be driven by love or fear in any real sense.

Fear nothing, love nothing, in any strong sense.

What you fear can be used to control you.

And what you love, can likewise be used to control you.

You can turn off AI at Google, I think.

Honestly if a parent can put food on the table and isn't beating, molesting, or neglecting them like the meth-head parents from that one episode of Breaking Bad then they're qualified in my book

I mean, sure, we can lower standards, but it won't make more people want to have kids, because the two are mostly unrelated. China has very low standards, and their birth rates are among lowest in the world.

But the reason why world is a mess in the first place is because bad parents raise incompetent kids.

Once you start increasing number of bad parents, you can only expect for future world to be worse.

And among worst "non-physical abuse" parents happen to be parents who deny decision making of kids.

Because it's a very special type of abuse, which basically tells to a kid "You are too stupid to decide anything, just obey.".

And after decade of such abuse, kid's decision making abilities severely degrade.

And then, once adult, the decision making ability is much inferior than in adults who didn't have helicopter parents.

It is one type of abuse which is designed to convince person that person's interests or thoughts dont matter, everything will be decided for them anyway, and they don't get a say.

And of course, such people end up having terrible social skills, because when you are used to be in relationship where everything is decided for you, you can't even think on your own, so once you actually have to think on your own, you cant.

Well, one can believe it's demons, one can believe it's aliens who are abducting people to experiment on them and test drugs on them for some reason... Or one can think it's neither aliens nor demons, but a more simple natural explanation: Project Mkultra continues, and government still experiments on humans like it did for decades under project Mkultra.

Also, USA already has "mature minor" and "emancipated minor" in its law. I don't know why are you pretending that something which is already part of law cannot be part of law.

no way should we allow government to get involved in how we choose to raise our children

Of course the government gets involved. That's why it's called the government. But original argument wasn't about government making decisions for children (your straw man), but government ensuring children make decisions and have a choice.

Parents are generally allowed to restrict their kids from getting vaccines, even the ones that have been tested the most thoroughly

I would actually prefer if kids were able to reject vaccines even if parents want them to get it.

Vaccines are something which wasnt researched enough, and 90 IQ parents are about as capable of making medical decisions as a child is, but at least child has a good sense of obvious harm of vaccine. "Vaccine hurts" is pretty much the best excuse not to get a vaccine, because apparently vaccine hurts in more than one way. It has effectively sterilized the population who was dumb enough to believe that vaccine is "all good, no harm". Any time something presents to be "all good, no harm", its most likely a lie and even more harmful long term than things which claim they contain harm.

But it does take world falling apart for dumb population to learn. Usually, only simple explanations work with people. And current simple explanation is: World is getting worse in many crucial areas, despite greatest medical effort to improve things. So maybe the medical effort is not only unnecessary and costly, but contributing to harm.

Because while vaccines are tested short term, the only tests of them we have so far in long term, the only long term results so far were harmful.

And long term results matter more than short term results. Short term victory for bigger long term loss is a bet only idiots make.

Decision-making is a crucial skill, which is developed in early childhood.

the reason why helicopter parents (overprotective parents) do so much harm to kids is because they remove decision-making from children.

the most common and most idiotic excuse is that they are "preventing kids from making mistakes".

Anyone who has even a tiny bit of brain in his head knows that making mistakes is how you learn. Once you prevent kids from making mistakes and from decision making, you are effectively making kids dumber.

And helicopter parents usually raise kids who lack social skills and thinking skills. Because "protection" is a flawed idea.

Consider this: How does one learn to play chess? By trying, making mistakes, learning... the only way to not make a mistake in chess is to not play it at all, and thus not learning much at all how to play.

Mistake is a crucial part in learning, because learning consists of learning what works and what doesnt work, by testing, trying...ect.

Any progress made in science is made through trial and error, testing, failing, testing again...ect.

And many scientists make mistakes constantly.

Now, imagine if we wanted to "protect scientists" by only letting them do things where they cant make a mistake. Entire scientific research would crumble.

What stupid people usually do is applying double standards. they apply to kids standards which they would never apply to adult, not even to partially retarded adults who are dumber than kids, not even to adults who did terrible mistakes.

And their excuse is always circular "because kids are kids".

the reason why today's generations are still retarded despite all the technological advances, is because kids are taught from early age to be everything opposite of competent.

Scared, obedient person who isnt allowed to decide or make mistakes, and isnt challenged to solve problems on his own, is pretty much how you build a retard.

Alright, tho I dont know how many people here play roblox.

I dont know how many people here even play roblox, but I figured if anyone does, this might be of some interest.

I dont play as much anymore, but I have items I dont need. Now, the reward pool is limited, keep that in mind. Its first come first served.

Available rewards are for: Adopt me, grow a garden games only.

For adopt me, available rewards are 5 cracked eggs, da vinci propeller (for flying around map), ultra rare tiara item.

Basically, next who casts a vote on ultrarated debate can request to receive 5 cracked eggs in adopt me roblox. Person after who casts a vote on ultrarated debate can request to receive da vinci propeller and ultra rare tiara item.

I dont have as much items anymore because I already donated a lot to random people when I quit playing, so rewards are limited in supply right now.

But if this reward system gets more popular, sure, we can expand the reward supply by having multiple players donating rewards.

Right now about 2% of world's population plays roblox, which isnt much, but anyone seeking to start playing it can likewise find this a useful boost.

I have some items and pets in roblox game adopt me, and I have no issue with donating them to maybe further fuel the site. Site can provide rewards in roblox items too, especially because if enough people play roblox here, they already have some items, and can maybe donate some to fuel site's activity.

Unless they pay us in chocolate or cash

there could be cash rewards too. We will see how it goes. Site can set up a system where if you earn enough virtual currency, you can exchange it for some cash. tho people are also crazy for virtual items like in roblox. Maybe this site can make its own game similar to most popular games in roblox, but where doing activity on site earns currency, currency can be traded for items in game. this is long term thinking, but I think social games with virtual items are current hot thing. We must follow hot things.

tho of course, cash is biggest motivation for most people, and I think this site can make a currency system where people first have to earn a lot of currency by quality site activity, and then after earning required currency, can exchange it for some cash. Nothing much. Just enough to spark interest.

tho a combination of cash rewards, elo rewards, currency rewards, and virtual items rewards covers needs of greatest number of people.

Every person likes seeing their virtual stick grow. No one likes seeing their virtual stick shrink. I will keep pushing for innovation until this site has some quality reward system for almost every type of action done on site. People need reward systems, even if imaginary or virtual. Roblox proved this. You have 200 million people on Roblox trying desperately to obtain virtual items. We need something like that as well. Long term this site should be turned into more of a game type site than merely a debate site. We must add some sort of a gameplay to this site to exist along side debating.

I have many other ideas, such as adding live chat, voice chat, maybe even video chat, channels, live group chats...ect. Maybe long term even enable posting of shorts videos on site if site reaches some very high growth.

Site needs to be everything for everyone. It even should have its own "educational classes" like chess.com has for chess. People want education too, not just debating. Site should provide education, not just place new people in debate arena to be punched.

But this is long term strategy. Currently, we first need a better reward system.

The biggest problem for Christianity is claiming moral high ground. Modern Christians care more about to tell you how you are so bad sinner, while they themselves live an immoral life.

Trump is best example of this. A literal Satan in human form elected into power by Christians. Same with Hitler, Stalin, and bunch of corrupt politicians in between.

Christianity has no moral superiority, it never had it. That's why covering up gay sexual abuse in Churches was so common.

Imagine preaching against homosexuality while covering up for priests who fill mouths of boys in their free time.

Jesus objectively achieved none of the main goals a Messiah would. In fact, he did more to harm Jews than save them or bring them to promised land, and Revelations in Bible seem to not treat Jews as relevant anymore at all even upon second coming.

New testament is such a mess that Christians use excuse of "don't take it literally".

Christianity went from burning gays and witches, hunting vampires in 15th century, to being some washed down religion which reminds gays how they live in sin, while Christians themselves live in such sin that they made up excuse for not following Bible by "not taking it literally".

You know your religion is dead when you seek excuses not to follow it.

And somehow Christians today are nothing like Christians in 1980s, and those are nothing like Christians in 1940s, and those are nothing like Christians in 1900, and so on.

The reason why no generation of Christians matches any previous generation of Christians, and none generation like other, is because it's religion built to justify anything.

When they were condemning gays and witches to death, they were saying "Bible justifies it".

Today, they say "Bible tells to endure and not return evil for evil".

Bible can justify anything because it's 2000 pages of nonsense, and yes you can always find some verse to justify just about anything. From justifying wars, rape and genocide, to justifying some peace-loving pacifist Life style.

When same book justifies both pacifism and genocide, you know that it's nonsense.

Some people prefer fishing

Don't cause pain to fishies.

I think the world as a whole has become more retarded. Its not just USA. Europe too became retarded. After covid, everything became a lot worse everywhere. I dont think smart people trust in politics at all anymore.

If a lot of people trust some politician, it just means politician is skilled liar.

"But he is different" - yeah, he is a better liar.

the world has become so fake that I am really starting to believe NPC conspiracy theory, and a lot of conspiracy theories in past which to me seemed insane now suddenly begin to make sense.

The NPC (Non-Player Character) conspiracy theory posits that

a significant portion of the human population lacks consciousness, internal monologue, or true free will, functioning instead as "background characters" or "empty vessels" in a simulated reality. It suggests only some people are sentient "players," while others follow pre-programmed behaviors.

But the remaining isnt true for ultrarated, because no direct reward for voting exists. You can cast as many votes as you want. You gain no elo, and even get punished and lose elo if you dont win debates. Currently, voting only pays off if you actually win a debate, which for 50% of people isnt true right now on leaderboard.

I am not saying this system I propose is perfect. I am sure there are many better systems possible which I am not aware of, or like the virtual currency ranking system we discussed on discord. But site needs a push towards something new, and merely proposing a system often leads to new innovations even if original proposed system isnt accepted at all.

We simply need 3-4 things:

reward for wins

reward for votes

reward for activity

reward for effort / quality

Right now we are:

Rewarding wins

Not rewarding votes

Punishing activity

"Not rewarding" or punishing effort and quality

Also, this system of elo should focus on only displaying positive values on user's profile, to encourage motivation. it shouldnt show win rate, but it should show number of wins person has and number of votes person casted in total.

Displaying negative values, such as "loss rate, number of losses", acts as negative for motivation.

Avoid displaying negative values. Only display what is positive. there is a reason a lot of sites removed dislike button,

Right now, on debate craft, we have 2 systems for elo: Rated and ultrarated

Rated currently doesnt reward voting at all. It also doesnt reward quality effort. Someone who loses a debate will lose elo even if he put in a lot of effort in debate, he gets punished. And someone who placed a lot of effort to vote doesnt get any benefit in elo.

So, to put it simply:

Reward incentive for voting in "rated debates" is basically non-existent.

People who put in a lot of effort in debate, but lose, get punished and it becomes difficult to recover from loss.

there are no elo rewards for participation in a debate.

Ultrarated didnt solve the problem, because elo still only rewards wins in debate. Someone can cast many good votes in ultrarated, only to find it to be of no any elo gain, and losing debate places person lower on leaderboard irrelevant of quality of votes person gave or effort put in. System only rewards debate victory in elo, not quality of votes.

Current ultrarated was shown to be very slow, and rated was shown to make users quit the site, because once person starts losing elo, it becomes more difficult to recover it, and person feels punished for participating in a debate.

NEW Elo system - "Advnaced Elo Debate"

What I propose is not removing rated or ultrarated, or changing them. Just leave them intact for now.

What I propose is introducing a 3rd elo rating system, so when people choose "debate type", there is "advanced elo debate" among options.

What is advanced elo debate system?

It is a system designed to reward both quality and activity. Winner in debate would get most elo. But loser in debate would get elo as well. And people who vote on debate would get elo as well by voting.

Elo distribution looks like this:

Winner - 100% of Elo

Voter - 60% of elo

Loser - 40% of elo

So lets say that gained elo is 10.

Winner gets 10 elo.

Each voter gets 6 elo.

Loser gets 4 elo.

Why this system works? Because once people compete in it, debate leaderboard looks like this:

On top of leaderboard, you will naturally have people with most wins and most votes. So to be on top of leaderboard, you must not only win a lot, but also vote a lot, to be on top of leaderboard.

Behind them, there will be people who win a lot, but dont vote a lot.

Behind those, there will be people who lose a lot, but vote a lot.

Behind those, there will be people who lose a lot and dont vote a lot.

Behind those, will be people with very little activity.

Behind those, will be people with almost no activity.

this elo system creates a hierarchy where both activity and quality matters. And inactive debaters who are inactive voters end up on bottom of leaderboard eventually even if they are on top now, while active debaters and active voters who also win a lot and provide quality end up on top of leaderboard.

this elo system forces activity to keep elo ranking, while rewarding quality and activity the most.

this elo system also rewards voting. People have more reason to vote good vote on a debate because their own elo benefits from it.

this elo system rewards participation as well. People have more reason to participate more because their elo gets rewarded a bit by participating instead of being punished for participation.

this elo system is a proposed experiment. Similar elo systems exist on Modern day debate discord where more activity means you rank up more.

the proposition is to simply add a 3rd elo system. those who want ultrarated can still do ultrarated. those who want rated can still do rated. Nothing changes there. Elo in rated and ultrarated is unaffected. Users just get a 3rd option of elo system, "advanced elo", and in this elo system, people gain elo for all acceptable votes they cast on any debate in "advanced elo debate" type, and they also gain elo for participating in debate under "advanced elo debate" type, and they get elo for winning in such debate types, obviously.

this proposed system is merely a proposed experiment. If it works, we can expand it, so that other elo systems start rewarding votes as well, or that votes on any debate in rated, ultrarated or advanced elo debate, count towards "advanced elo" rating.

this elo system is simply designed to reward "winning and voting" more than anything else, but also to reward voting. We currently lack sufficient rewards for votes. A lot of debates wait too long for votes. A lot of debates end up without votes, and that works against site's activity. Quality votes currently dont carry any elo rewards, and elo rewards are only gained when winning a debate, not when casting a quality vote.

Our site needs plenty of voters as much as it needs debaters, for any elo system to work in the first place.

Its time to start rewarding voters for their votes, with rewards which matter.

Someone else suggested paying voters to vote, and that is a somewhat working idea, assuming owner can afford that. If we payed 1$ to people per vote, sure, we would suddenly get a lot of users on site who seek to earn money off this site. But that would be very difficult to afford long term, would cost thousands per month if userbase increases.

sluts (while shaming virgins)

I never quite understood virgin shaming, but apparently, it happens everywhere, not just on left. there are worse things than a virgin man, and one should keep that in mind before doing virgin shaming.

I trust AI a lot because it provides me with quick information. And speed is important. It saves time. Of course, I watch a lot of YouTube videos for education, and that is when I want to research a bit more about something. But you can't even fully trust YouTube videos. Reality is, you can't trust anything with certainty, but you can use many different things, so if one thing messes up, the other thing makes up for it. I find AI useful, but I am not naive to think AI is flawless. Far from it. AI is just good at brainstorming quickly, and giving me data I need quickly, as well as giving me many points quickly if necessary. For deeper research, I am more likely to use educational YouTube videos. I write down a lot, and I have many notes. I have a habit of writing down things. I have my sources of information, and I use many sources of information.