Fight Club Pub.

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
Shock, will you take the test?
You might not wanna know what lurks within your soul.

There are like a million different tests. Also, the site seems heavily iniflected with political affiliations.

Politics and Morals don't mix...

I'll pass on this one. Besides, everytime I take an inward look at myself, I scare the living hell out of me...

reply to post by whatukno


that so far has been my favorite aspect of these debates like in my first round where i had to defend warrantless wiretapping. I thought ugh what a nightmare this must be punishment for some of my less than strategic out-bursts but it ended up actually helping me broaden my perspective. Cant wait for round 3

and the crowd goes wild, "CW! CW! CW! CW! CW!"

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Politics and Morals don't mix...

Sounds like someone's thinking and/or hinting about new topics for round three.

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Naah, I think that's just ATS common sense. Well, a long day of work and a completed summary of my closing statement. How about a glass of the 'good stuff', SD? Yes, that's right, the one in the bottle labeled "Boone's Farm Whiskie".... ah, perfect.

Originally posted by Ian McLean
reply to post by schrodingers dog

 

Naah, I think that's just ATS common sense. Well, a long day of work and a completed summary of my closing statement. How about a glass of the 'good stuff', SD? Yes, that's right, the one in the bottle labeled "Boone's Farm Whiskie".... ah, perfect.

Much as I'd love to debate the issue, it actually is not that aside from my current debate, so I think it's best to stay quiet on the subject. Pretty good advice for myself in general.

Tonight we have an Averna/Goldschlager 7uptini special.
Would you like to try that?

reply to post by schrodingers dog

No!

As much as I like to encourage fairness and discretion, such things end at the moment they start to infringe upon honest, necessary self-expression. I will be bold, and state that none of us here value our debate so much, that we would consider worries about their 'integrity' as valid grounds for anyone to feel inhibited in voicing anything that needs voicing.

Let's not censor ourselves, in side-discussion, beyond our individual decisions of fairness. There's should be no implied policy of 'no-comment'. I've seen members explicitly turn down offers of help and reference supply from others, during an ongoing debate, because they didn't think it would be right -- I think we're all able to regulate our own expression of 'fairness'.

And if we don't? Well, that's what the adversarial system is all about. Why hide from reality, behind needlessly-contrived regulation? The complete rules of each debate are specified in the OP; members are free within the T&C; that's what should be regarded as canon.

reply to post by Ian McLean


You know, It has become my impression that, insofar as the debaters here, we all are very aware that we must dedicate ourselves to the proposition that our position in a debate takes precedence over personal belief. If such a topic were to arise that we could not separate our personal position, I'm think we would recuse ourselves and not engage in subjectively influencing our ability to argue.

But hey, it's early..., SD... I'll take a Baileys on the rocks. My tummy hurts.

Originally posted by whatukno
Man, thank god I'm done with THAT debate! Shesh oh pete! Great topic there MemoryShock.

Seriously, that is what is great about these debates, sometimes you get the side of the debate that goes against your own moral and ethical views and you get to learn about the other side of an issue that you may not necessarily agree with.

Now after I get home from work I'm going to drink away the images I had to research out of my head!

Gaah. Finished.

Here, lemme buy you a drink.

reply to post by Ian McLean


Cheers to a successfull debate completed Great job by the way, I have to say that was an excelent debate and you did an awesome job.

I feel sorry for the judges who have to decide over your debate whatukno and IanMcLean.

No doubt. That debate was nasty. Maybe we should make them go into sudden death? We'll fly 'em to Vegas and let them fight it out.

reply to post by MemoryShock


Shock, can u please check your U2U. Thanks.

reply to post by whatukno

And well done yourself, sir!

Really emotionally trying, that topic. Tough stuff.

reply to post by schrodingers dog

Done...and back in full MemoryShock avatar form...I couldn't any longer...Too much...

Yikes, that WAS close. Literally 24 hrs to the minute.
I was enjoying my Dark&Stormy so much I lost track of time and science.
Have you guys tried dark&stormies?

Edit: Thanks for that MS, it looked a little to emphatic. Like I was screaming or something.





[edit on 9/10/2008 by schrodingers dog]

Oh man I'm done with my end of the debate, woah I really really need a drink, anyway it's right here and I really hope I didn't screw anything up

Round 2: LDragonFire v maria_stardust: Rigged Elections

It was a pleasure debating you maria_stardust looking forward to your closing remarks



[edit on 11-9-2008 by LDragonFire]

I finished mine the other day as well. I could definitely use a drink after that one.

Wasn't a difficult topic or anything, but it was one of the most head ache inducing debates I've ever been in.

I look forward to moving on and getting this thing judged.

reply to post by nyk537


That was probably the best one I read. You two did really well, plus the topic is as good as it gets for debating.

reply to post by TruthWithin


WHERE CAN I GET ONE?!?!?!?