Panel Discussions

Started by Gold Trumpet, February 10, 2004, 11:37:22 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 4 5
User actions

Gold Trumpet

February 10, 2004, 11:37:22 AM
An idea similiar to the Content Area, this may be more feasible to happen now. It is Panel Discussion and the general rules would go like this:

A general topic is agreed upon.

5 delegates volunteer to discuss the topic, are given a week or so in which to research the topic.

Each delegate would be forced to write at least once a day at an extended length of discussion and insight, whether it be an original idea to the topic or a reply to what someone else has said.

Wildcards exists in anyone who wants to add comments in the discussion. Delegates could respond to this as well, but the delegates have to write something every day, contributing everything they studied.

The reason I think this would work over the Content Area for now is that no one would be forced to committ to anything for an extended period of time, but just to the specific topic in the limited time frame it will be discussed. No person holds rank as being able to be delegate before anyone else so anyone can participate and everyone is encouraged to do so at least once. Also, everyone should be recommended to suggest topics and make sure it is general enough to last a week between 5 people.

I think this can work because it forces nothing upon administrators in creating any new or special areas. It can easily be held within any thread. I'm just hoping administrative approval will make this more official and get people to want to contribute.

pete

#1
February 10, 2004, 11:56:32 AM
sounds good, but I think a week of research then a week of insights would be stressful for most people here since most of the posters have jobs family school and drug habits and such.  So...longer research time and shorter posting time?  five people for five days for example.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

Gold Trumpet

#2
February 10, 2004, 12:00:16 PM
Quote from: petesounds good, but I think a week of research then a week of insights would be stressful for most people here since most of the posters have jobs family school and drug habits and such.  So...longer research time and shorter posting time?  five people for five days for example.

Sounds fine. Lets hope some excitement comes for this project to actually see it get off the ground. In theory, to just start it, we'd need only five people to sign up for the first one. I'd be willing, no doubt. Also, people should recommend topics in this thread too.

SoNowThen

#3
February 10, 2004, 12:05:13 PM
Ugh, research?! Can't I just argue with ignorant enthusiasm?


But I'm interested. Definitely. At least to give it a trial run.

How would the wild cards work?
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

cron

#4
February 10, 2004, 12:08:01 PM
name an example please,  i'm not following  you very well.
context, context, context.

Gold Trumpet

#5
February 10, 2004, 12:11:54 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenHow would the wild cards work?

Well, the panel discussion wouldn't be that different from any other thread. Its just discussion would be guranteed with the 5 delegates who would have to write and anyone else who replied on this discussion would be a wildcard. That's all.

kotte

#6
February 10, 2004, 12:12:58 PM
I'm in...

Gold Trumpet

#7
February 10, 2004, 12:16:30 PM
Quote from: cronopioname an example please,  i'm not following  you very well.

OK,  lets say the topic of "Is Paul Thomas Anderson overrated?" is introduced. The delegates who volunteered to research this would reply in length, at least once a day, to this topic. It would be in a thread and everyone else would be willing to reply as well. Its just the 5 delegates would be forced to really go into detail and argue amongst each other and the wild cards involved in the discussion. Its like any other thread, but with more detail and analysis applied.

cron

#8
February 10, 2004, 12:23:05 PM
thanks,    sounds very good. what do the admins. think about this?
context, context, context.

ono

#9
February 10, 2004, 12:26:19 PM
I think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.

Gold Trumpet

#10
February 10, 2004, 12:35:29 PM
Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.

Well, it only has to last 5 days between 5 people really and everyone supplying opinions can only help it. This also doesn't have to happen all the time. Just when a topic comes across and people want to debate it. Also, much of the value in this will come from how good the topic is and not any topic will be allowed. It will have to a be a topic that will make people want to take specific sides and defend it ardently. I'm not saying these discussions will prove longer or better than other ones, but I think a lot of discussions going on right now are kinda superficial. If this succeeds in any point, it will be that the people were forced to delve into the subjects.

©brad

#11
February 10, 2004, 12:43:01 PM
Quote from: cronopiothanks,    sounds very good. what do the admins. think about this?

i think it really doesn't matter what admins think. anyone can pretty much do anything they want. (save disruptive and/or spammish behavior)

i myself am swamped w/ research work for school, but encourage others to rock on w/ this if they have the time/means/energy.

go for it!

Duck Sauce

#12
February 10, 2004, 01:44:46 PM
Quote from: OnomatopoeiaI think forced, planned debates will fizzle out and die very quickly.  The better ones just happen.


I beg to differ... I will respond with more in a week

Jeremy Blackman

#13
February 10, 2004, 02:15:12 PM
I think the best debates are spontaneous and develop naturally. But if we can find some really specific troubling and complex topic, it could work.

pete

#14
February 10, 2004, 04:35:40 PM
will the DEBATE itself will be spontaneous, because how do you know what the other person is going to say and how are you going to respond in advance?  So the idea, if I read correctly, is that five people would be well-researched enough, passionate enough, and prepared enough for something to come out of the debate, since it's between at least five people who supposedly know what they're talking about.  I see no wrong in assigning a topic, I don't think that's forcing any kind of tension (though a question like "is PTA overrated", especially on this board, is probably not a good idea) or contriving any kind of argument.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 4 5
User actions