to wish people would learn how to ^debate^ things on here!

[seeker]

A small example - trivial in this case but typical of loads of discussions abotu all sorts of topics.

'i don"t think a 4 year old should have to wear a tie as part of his school uniform"

"Oh, i think school uniform is a really good idea - it's so much more difficult if they wear their own clothes"

The straw man is alive and well and living on mumsnet

kungfupannda Brilliant image!

Do we get the top seats?

What? The ones where you are apparently suspended eerily over your oppositions' heads?

Oh thank the lord I'm not the only one.
I watched UC with Bamber, convinced that's how the teams worked.
Then Paxman came along and showed me what a fool I'd been.

Yes, I want the top seats. So we can drop things on them :o

Trillian Godwin's law doesn't say you lose if you mention Nazi's, it concedes that the reference may be entirely appropriate in context.

I understand Godwin's law simply to say that the longer an internet thread continues, the more likely it is that someone will mention Nazis.

Just googled it, seems to confirm what I said.

That's good....

Otoh, I think debating is just so much posturing.

There are good arguments to be made on both sides of most subjects.

It all goes around and around and around and around.

When you get to my great age you are rarely shocked by any opinion you see any more.

And, sometimes, there are good debates going on on Mumsnet but it only takes one twatty poster who wants to derail, or quote Hitler, or link to the Daily Mail or something for everyone else to get sidetracked by that.

Yellowstone I did start with long argument -> inevitable that one side will compare the others to the Nazis. I just decided to throw in the 'you lose' because in most circumstances you do. Plus I think it best (in the interests of debate) to discourage people from making Nazi comparisons, and if I have to lie about Godwin's law to do that then I will

bibbity it's all about context.

Some people bully on MN with no sound reason to justify their bullying. They clearly just want to bully.

Trillian, on that one people disagree.

So have we decided on our team/opposition/approach yet?

And how do we issue the challenge? Do we get our HQ to ring their HQ and say "Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough?"

Really Yellowstone? I have seen only two or three threads on Mumsnet that I would categorise as bullying - and even then there was loads of support for the "victim" and pulling the questionable posters up on their behaviour.

I can't think of a single poster who I would write off as a dedicated bully who clearly just wants to bully.

So I disagree with you and you disagree with me. That's more or less the end of the debate ime!

My pet hate is the straw man. So easy to exaggerate and then shoot that down. But a good one is very effective as it can entice you in, but it's still not good debating.

Ad hominems, appeals to authority and to nature, begging the question all ruin an argument.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc very common on here.

I used to debate at the Oxford Union, but wasn't an especially skilled debater, even though I supposedly 'knew' the rules and prided myself on using logic as a rhetorical device. My boyfriend of the time was a splendidly good one, went on to be a presidential speechwriter.

Agree Seeker - I tend to switch off from many 'discussions' as they quickly begin to degenerate.

otchayaniye, is your ex on any kind of forum?

kungfu, I think we should get MN to put it on their agenda at the next staff meeting and then they can do some blue sky thinking outside the box or something and come up with an approach.

OR

We can go round other forums with arms linked shouting:

WHO WANTS TO PLAY... DE-BA-TING?....WHO WANTS TO PLAY... DE-BA-TING?...WHO WANTS TO PLAY... DE-BA-TING?

You get the idea.

I know which one I prefer.

My problem in debating with you, Seeker, is that I almost always agree with everything you say.

suckup

[Links arms with Tethers and prepares to start chanting]

So who is going to referee? I propose Clothnappytree - they can't possibly have anything contentious to bring to the debate.

bibbity I was a bit surprised by the nature of the attacks by several posters on one other poster on a faith schools thread the other day. Very unpleasant. She held her own pretty well I'm glad to say. I don't know enough about MN to 'know' specific posters, but there have been a few threads I've seen recently where I've definitely been taken aback.

YADNBU about the quality of debate on MN OP.