Twitch is actively trying to cover up the optics of their streamers getting SA at twitchcon, stuff is getting really bad, not to mention last year there was SA as well.
Should we boycott twitch/twitchcon? Is it too soon to make a call?
Discuss/debate
Edit:
Or a pattern of forfeit votes is evident.
Simple. If a person repeatedly forfeits you dont allow them to debate. Like 3 times in a row. Then let them make an appeal process, or just not allow them.
The easiest way to do this is add 4th option. Forfeit, to voting.
Most of the amount of wins people achieved in dart and possibly ddo was from people who foreited a debate, be it more than half or the whole debate entirely.
Why should that count toward the other person's rating just cause someone didnt show up? This doesnt show merit on the side of the person who debated more than half the debate, it shows faithfulness to a discussion.
I personally dont believe it should be counted if debate is Full Forfeit or over half forfeit. Wether from 1 side or both sides.
I disbelieve in certain labels of gods. Does that count?
Spacejams
Lola bunny
Back in 1980s this move came out, is it possible people wouldnt watch the GOAT of basketball in a movie? Sure.
But after that, furrism increased dramatically.
Was MJ to blame?
Discuss/debate
Acts 18:6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.
TO ultimately serve God is to totally die to self will. There is no other way.
Most know john 3:16
But they forget verse 17 and on wards.
John 3:17-21
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
The name Jesus in hebrew Yeshuah, means God (who puts on/has become) salvation.
Only God can save us. And through Jesus Christ he does, to all who repent of their good and evil and turn to him.
The purpose of the law was to show man is not righteous, that man cannot cease from sin, that man cannot do good.
So God told man his precepts to his people through moses, if they thought to serve God through flesh, there will be blessings and cursings.
They failed.
All of them.
So then came Jesus Christ, to show the way of salvation is not through flesh, nor through man's capability, nor through man's righteousness. But through Jesus Christ. To submit to the Holy Spirit of God. To take up our cross, deny ourselves and follow Jesus.
We are in a unique point where our judges are more left winged influenced, id say pray for em.
And as for trinitarian doctrine. That indeed is a lie, and i deny it also.
Law required the adulterous man and woman to be stoned. They only brought the woman, so Jesus just wrote on the ground and told them that whoever is without sin can cast the first stone.
Obviously they all had sinned in that they didnt bring the adulterous man and was just using this woman as a prop to condemn Jesus. Its possible they set it up cause they caught her in "the very act" of adultery.
Its evident you have no understanding of the precepts of the bible, and likely of reality its self, how it was necessary to prove the failure and inadequacy of man through law, to teach that through Jesus Christ alone is hope of salvation. The man christ Jesus suffered, felt and desired as we did, yet without sin. The humanity of Christ cried "if its possible, take this cup from me" the humanity of christ said "my god my god why has thou forsaken me?"
You do not know truth, you only intellectualize what you think you understand. You cannot know God while serving satan.
You appreciate order then. I have no qualms with that. Ego is not inspiration enough, will is, the will to contest ideas, the will to be proven right.
Competition is a folly for vanity, i have no regard for it.
Ego building. In contrast distances people from others in debating non ultra topics.
What stakes? You literally lose nothing but time. If you lose.
Frankly thats nonsensical. Every topic is worthy of a person's best. Now if you wanna rate topics as lesser value, that generally speaking is subjective.
If debates are objectively non realistic, perhaps.
But even still, the concept of ranking is flawed.
As for voting? Thats basically just formalized opinions. Why should people grandize a person who has a lot of people liking their arguementation or approving their logic?
Vanity.
But to seek truth and to weigh the subject matters are useful for consideration of a point of view.
I made mention on some of these things in another thread. Egoism doesnt make a website to prosper. You have seen dart and ddo. How long did having a high rank make people stay? Less than 2 years on average, its community that keeps the platform going.
Debating on a website is not a sport. People would rather watch rl debates, so that as an arguement is shot down.
If this website wants new debaters, its gonna need new values. This isnt dart 2.0.
Im genuinely sorry if the people here feel otherwise, all they know is what they desire.
The concept of ultra debating is as flawed as the former DART version of it, you segregate people based on effort instead of ideas, you create a vaccum and gate keeping effect that spirals towards echo chamberism. Sure it may be consider minimal now, but it wont be in the future. Dart and ddo proved that with the website adaptations to it.
What is most concerning is that it hints at the idea that rating is meaningful. Debates dont mean a thing if they dont convince someone of a arguement or a postion, otherwise all you have is philosophical ranting.
Further, the concept insist upon its self and build egoism, "look at me, im great cause of my rating or debate wins!" When on any given day someone smarter or more eloquent can come along and win in a debate against you by bringing better arguements. The ratings, the rankings are meaningless.
I encourage people to discuss the concept of this idea, but experience from dart alone should make most people here pause and consider, cause where there is higher approved debates, that means other debates, despite context, must be lower.
And that, i refuse to acknowledge in the realm of intellectual discourse, as people are favored above ideas.
But what do yall think? Is ultra rated debates meaningful? Should merit really be so important as long as people follow the rubrics in debates?
Why should people invest their time in such a thing when they can already debate ideas with anyone, instead of an echo chamber of familar names?
Discuss/debate.
#ultroegoism
I am ardently against the idea of credit system on precept. You get people being activist for (debates in this case) clauses that they may have no intrest in.
A meritocracy debating format, that can encourage elitism. despite what previous websites may have shown, elitism and meritocracy have no value in the forum of ideas.
Call it whatever you want. Frankly its just a form of gate keeping.
Never tell me how to dialogue.
You dont like what i say? Be a man and tell me.
Or block me.
If i wanted your advice, id ask for it.
Now. If you wanna spam threads for attention, thats your business.
If you dont want my opinion on them, tell me.
All you are doing is introducing derogatory language. And i am inherently against that, if its toward people or a group of people.
Your other 2 click bait threads proved your point, thats all.
Keep this up and ill ask mods to step in.
Some of the arguementation and words are getting pretty weird in some debates. But think of it in this way, ai can be used to interpret your own or your opponents debates when you have a hard time understanding their wording.
What would ai generalize or summarize your debate arguements as, and compare that to what you actually are trying to say?
Would they be identical or different?
So basically the other 2 threads you made on this but with more derogatory language.
The hole is filled by God. Each day we choose to fill it with earthly things. But if instead we feed it eternal things, and walk in the light of Jesus, there will be contentment and peace.
Transgenderism is the result of a reprobate mind. To deny creation and established desires and the logics guiding them. To enter a frame of mind guided by feelings.
Wether a person has intial desire or lack of desire, doesnt justify or validate the extreme to deny one's own nature in persuit of identity and pleasure.
Mind looking at this? Either im misreading what debbie said or they are falsely accusing me of dying in a year?
What are you falsely accusing me of?
Are you literally wanting me to die within a year?
Bible doesnt believe in race or culture. All are christs.
Edit: a name is who you are. If you are named by mankind, it is temporal, if by God or Jesus Christ, eternal.
Furthermore. Do a research on stoning. Stoning is always done for those who REJECTED God. Be it his sabbath, his word, serving other Gods, defiling God's presence, and those who rebelled via witchcraft, necromancy things of that nature. And always had 2 or more witnesses.
Job 5:17,23 17 Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty:
23 For thou shalt be in league with the stones of the field: and the beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee.
