Debating Face to Face, or online?

TKDB

An example of what I'm alluding to:

@ZeusAres42

"@TKDB

"As for your wanting to have a public debate with me the answer is no to you only."
"I would prefer a public debate with someone far more challenging and mind taxing."
"No offense."

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

An example of what I'm alluding to:

TKDB said:

An example of what I'm alluding to. 

@TKDB Enjoy your trolling cake of words.

And get it through to your dense skull that you are not worthy of having any kind serious debate with either online or in public. 

There are plenty of worthy people here and  you are not one of them. But you keep telling yourself you are a great debater that everyone is scared to have a public debate with; one day you might even convince yourself this is true.

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

So says the online debater.

Your words were easy to type, weren't they?

"And get it through to your dense skull that you are not worthy of having any kind serious debate with either online or in public."

"There are plenty of worthy people here and  you are not one of them.

"But you keep telling yourself you are a great debater that everyone is scared to have a public debate with; one day you might even convince yourself this is true."

You keep telling yourself the above, because it's the only way that you know how to debate, through standard one side debating.

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

So says the online debater.

Your words were easy to type, weren't they?

So says the online debater.

You keep telling yourself the the above, because it's only way that you know how to debate through standard one side debating.

ZeusAres42

Plaffelvohfen said:

@TKDB

Remember to watch the tears @TKDB

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

@ZeusAres42

"So says the online debater.

You keep telling yourself the the above, because it's only way that you know how to debate through standard one side debating."

Your fear of debating in Public, is obvious.

I guess I'll have to fly overseas, to Publicly debate either one of you, right @ZeusAres42, and @Plaffelvohfen?

Dee

****Which of the two makes for a more educational or enlightening experience?

If you were involved neither ........

ZeusAres42

@TKDB

Lots of us have tried having a serious debate with you in the past but it it appears that is not your intention. So why should we waste our time having a serious debate with someone who has no intention of having a serious discussion?

Even me writing this little bit is going to prove futile via your next most likely troll post. If I won 10 bucks for every time I predicted your next post I would be a millionaire by now.

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

More of your non public debating talk:

"Lots of us have tried having a serious debate with you in the past but it it appears that is not your intention. So why should we waste our time having a serious debate with someone who has no intention of having a serious discussion?"

"Even me writing this little bit is going to prove futile via your next most likely troll post. If I won 10 bucks for every time I predicted your next post I would be a millionaire by now."

All you've accustomed yourself to doing is online debating?

@Dee

And a prime example of your non public debate talk as well.

"If you were involved neither ........"

Dee

@TKDB

***** And a prime example of your non public debate talk as well.

This forum is open to and used by the public , you really are terribly  

TKDB

The online Atheists, are the premiere debaters on the internet.

CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the NRA, the pro Marijuana movement, the pro illegal drug crowd, the pro Illegal Immigration crowd, the pro Abortion crowd, the pro Sanctuary City crowd, and the pro Liberal, and Socialist Liberal followers, or constituents fan bases, have NOTHING on the online Atheist movement. 

Their movement is the Tip of the online debate iceberg.

And it's a movement, that is for the most part Global. 

TKDB

@Dee

More of the same:
Another example of your non public debate talk as well.

"This forum is open to and used by the public , you really are terribly ."

Debating Face to Face, or online?

Is the theme of the forum. 

Your use of the word "," is stereotypical.

Dee

@TKDB

*****Your use of the word “” is stereotypical 

I agree your stupidity is widely known and fixed and it’s an oversimplified term regarding you in keeping with your simpletons mentality 

stereotypical

/stɛrɪə(ʊ)ˈtɪpɪk(ə)l,stɪərɪə(ʊ)ˈtɪpɪk(ə)l/

Learn to pronounce

adjective

adjective: stereotypical

1. relating to a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.

   "he fits the stereotypical masculine image of toughness"

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

More of your non public debating talk:

"Lots of us have tried having a serious debate with you in the past but it it appears that is not your intention. So why should we waste our time having a serious debate with someone who has no intention of having a serious discussion?"

"Even me writing this little bit is going to prove futile via your next most likely troll post. If I won 10 bucks for every time I predicted your next post I would be a millionaire by now."

All you've accustomed yourself to doing is online debating?

@Dee

And a prime example of your non public debate talk as well.

"If you were involved neither ........"

Prediction confirmed. 10 bucks for me.

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

The online Atheists, are the premiere debaters on the internet.

CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the NRA, the pro Marijuana movement, the pro illegal drug crowd, the pro Illegal Immigration crowd, the pro Abortion crowd, the pro Sanctuary City crowd, and the pro Liberal, and Socialist Liberal followers, or constituents fan bases, have NOTHING on the online Atheist movement. 

Their movement is the Tip of the online debate iceberg.

And it's a movement, that is for the most part Global. 

Keep going. You could have a block buster movie going on here. You could call it the online atheist.

ZeusAres42

@Dee

It would be pretty funny though TKDB trying to get past the Moderator on a Face to Face debate platform though. This is how the dialogue would go:

Debate Mod: "That is not what this debate is about. If you're going to have this debate, you need to keep it relevant."

TKDB "Where is your evidence that is not what this debate is about outside of your Moderator mindset? Are you also an Atheist with a non-religious rhetoric?

Debate Mod: "I have clearly just shown you what this debate is going to be about. If you want another debate then please book another one."

TKDB: "You're entitled to your own Moderator biased opinion that you have from the pedestal of your MOD chair?"

Anyway, @TKDB has given me an idea about like having a group debate in the future perhaps but he's not invited.

Dee

@ZeusAres42

Ha , Ha , that’s exactly him all over , have you ever actually seen him make a point or post up a sensible debate , I know I haven’t 

Nope

Face to Face debating holds the advantage of having more efficient and fluid communication. Online debating holds the advantage of being convenient and more accessible which allows for some perspectives that may not be available with face to face debating. People may also be more honest when they are free from personal judgement but this may also lead to a chamber affect or off topic debating.

MayCaesar

There is no comparison. When you debate someone face to face, you can quickly ask clarifying questions, intercept statements half-way through, have some control over the direction of the conversation - and, most importantly, all parties involved are incentivised to act in a more-or-less civil manner, as there are immediate, tangible consequences to disrespecting the other person. On the other hand, on the Internet you can do pretty much whatever you want with no negative consequences, you can ignore what others say, you can post the same thing over and over until your opponent throws hands and quits, and you can pretend to be someone you are not.

Just look at how people talk to each other in this thread. Would they ever talk to human beings like this in real life, calling them names to their face and mocking them openly in front of anyone? Probably not, as nobody likes people who do that, and they would be ostracised by pretty much everyone. Yet here they can do it all they want, because nobody knows who they really are.

The Internet !@#$%^&; Theorem holds, as strong as ever.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

"The Internet !@#$%^&; Theorem holds, as strong as ever."

The Internet is weak, it's not Real Life, or Real World.

"Just look at how people talk to each other in this thread. Would they ever talk to human beings like this in real life, calling them names to their face and mocking them openly in front of anyone? Probably not, as nobody likes people who do that, and they would be ostracised by pretty much everyone. Yet here they can do it all they want, because nobody knows who they really are."

When people are afraid to debate face to face, their weakness is worn on their faces.

And this is why millions of so called debaters, debate on the Internet, so that they can hide their faces.

Your theorem talk is sad, and irrelevant to the forum.


"In mathematics, a theorem is a non-self-evident statement that has been proven to be true, either on the basis of generally accepted statements such as axioms or on the basis previously established statements such as other theorems."

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

@Dee ;

Debate me face to face, in person?

Because I challenge both of you brave souls, to say the same rhetoric to me, in public?

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

@Dee ;

Debate me face to face, in person?

Because I challenge both of you brave souls, to say the same rhetoric to me, in public?

Why don't you practice what you preach?  Take your own advice?

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

Please, Define the logic behind your argument?

"Why don't you practice what you preach?  Take your own advice?"

Because you won't do face to face, thus your internet enabled Atheist style of debating is done from behind your computer.

You like the upper hand, or the high ground when you debate.

Thus debating face to face, means that once you saw me in REAL LIFE, you would, turn and walk away.

And that style of debating logic, is what you preach to me often.

Here's the evidence to that, because of this post that you expressed to Dee:

"@Dee

It would be pretty funny though TKDB trying to get past the Moderator on a Face to Face debate platform though. This is how the dialogue would go:

Debate Mod: "That is not what this debate is about. If you're going to have this debate, you need to keep it relevant."

TKDB "Where is your evidence that is not what this debate is about outside of your Moderator mindset? Are you also an Atheist with a non-religious rhetoric?

Debate Mod: "I have clearly just shown you what this debate is going to be about. If you want another debate then please book another one."

TKDB: "You're entitled to your own Moderator biased opinion that you have from the pedestal of your MOD chair?"

Anyway, @TKDB has given me an idea about like having a group debate in the future perhaps but he's not invited."


The above is how you debate.

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

Please, Define the logic behind your argument?

"Why don't you practice what you preach?  Take your own advice?"

Because you won't do face to face, thus your internet enabled Atheist style of debating is done from behind your computer.

You like the upper hand, or the high ground when you debate.

Thus debating face to face, means that once you saw me in REAL LIFE, you would, turn and walk away.

And that style of debating logic, is what you preach to me often.

Here's the evidence to that, because of this post that you expressed to Dee:

"@Dee

It would be pretty funny though TKDB trying to get past the Moderator on a Face to Face debate platform though. This is how the dialogue would go:

Debate Mod: "That is not what this debate is about. If you're going to have this debate, you need to keep it relevant."

TKDB "Where is your evidence that is not what this debate is about outside of your Moderator mindset? Are you also an Atheist with a non-religious rhetoric?

Debate Mod: "I have clearly just shown you what this debate is going to be about. If you want another debate then please book another one."

TKDB: "You're entitled to your own Moderator biased opinion that you have from the pedestal of your MOD chair?"

Anyway, @TKDB has given me an idea about like having a group debate in the future perhaps but he's not invited."


The above is how you debate.

No, but is how I respond to trolls. When you're serious with me I'll be serious back to you.

If you're not trolling and you are being sincere, and you sincerely believe everything you're saying then I apologize.

Furthermore, as an Atheist, I am also in a sense an Apatheist meaning I simply and generally don't care if you are religious or not (belief in a God or Not) providing that you're not following and believing in something that could cause harm to oneself or others.

Also, in order be biased against something you have to have a belief in the first place. How can someone be biased against something they don't even believe in, such as the case with Atheism who are don't possess a belief in God or religion?

What's more, is that I am not an Antitheist, meaning that I do not oppose and protest everything to do with religion. And nor have I ever done so on this site or elsewhere.

I have made this position of mine very clear now. If you still don't get my position then I really don't know what else I can say that will make you get it.

BTW, conceding certain points when necessary is not a sign of weakness; it's actually a sign of strength, as well as being the only way to recover from logical flaws. Take this tip or leave it but if you continue to defend irrelevant/illogical arguments, factual errors, etc. you'll never ever reach enlightenment.

Dee

@TKDB

**** Debate me face to face, in person?

You don’t debate you Troll 

****Because I challenge both of you brave souls, to say the same rhetoric to me, in public?

Well seen as you cannot defend yourself online how would you expect to do it face to face?

Dee

@TKDB

No it’s not , it’s how Trolls are treated ....Are you going to burst out in tears .....again?

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

You just self defined how you DEBATE.

You're a sad debater. 

"No, but is how I respond to trolls. When you're serious with me I'll be serious back to you."

"What's more, is that I am not an Antitheist, meaning that I do not oppose and protest everything to do with religion. And nor have I ever done so on this site or elsewhere."

"Apatheist meaning I simply and generally don't care if you are religious or not (belief in a God or Not) providing that you're not following and believing in something that could cause harm to oneself or others."

You're fooling yourself, where's YOUR LEGITIMATE evidence that Religion has caused harm to me or others?


, you oppose and protest me often.

I'm serious as can be, when I address your online name.


That's why I'm not AFRAID to debate you to your face. 

Because I guarantee you, I'd have a great time debating YOU IN PERSON.

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

You just self defined how you DEBATE.

You're a sad debater. 

"No, but is how I respond to trolls. When you're serious with me I'll be serious back to you."

"What's more, is that I am not an Antitheist, meaning that I do not oppose and protest everything to do with religion. And nor have I ever done so on this site or elsewhere."

"Apatheist meaning I simply and generally don't care if you are religious or not (belief in a God or Not) providing that you're not following and believing in something that could cause harm to oneself or others."

You're fooling yourself, where's YOUR LEGITIMATE evidence that Religion has caused harm to me or others?


, you oppose and protest me often.

I'm serious as can be, when I address your online name.


That's why I'm not AFRAID to debate you to your face. 

Because I guarantee you, I'd have a great time debating YOU IN PERSON.

So, debating to you is about getting one over another person? What exactly do you gain or learn by calling other people sad individuals? And how is that debating? So, it's not about learning something from rational discourse? To you, it's all about tit for tat? And that to you is not sad debating right?

Also, why haven't you realized that most of us here have actually have had face to face debates with people in person already? @TKDB

Also, I said I don't protest or oppose religion.  And I've already explained countless times how radical beliefs can lead to harm such as terrorist acts, for instance, such as that attack on the Twin Towers remember?

ZeusAres42

 

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

Because I'd rather debate you face to face ZeusAres42, and because in person, you can't hide behind one of your typically stated arguments, like the various responses like the ones below.

And me and YOU, debating face to face has zero to do with your lip service commentary over the "Twin Towers."


"So, debating to you is about getting one over another person?"
(Did I say the above?, NO YOU DID!)

"What exactly do you gain or learn by calling other people sad individuals?"
(Because you are sad.)

"And how is that debating?"
(Because you don't know how to debate.)

"So, it's not about learning something from rational discourse?
To you, it's all about tit for tat?
And that to you is not sad debating right?"
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

"Also, why haven't you realized that most of us here have actually have had face to face debates with people in person already? @TKDB"
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

Also, I said I don't protest or oppose religion. 
And I've already explained countless times how radical beliefs can lead to harm such as terrorist acts, for instance, such as that attack on the Twin Towers remember? 
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

 

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

Isn't the below parliamentary system how the governing individuals in your country, have debates?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system

"A parliamentary system or parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic governance of a state where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the confidence of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that parliament. Wikipedia "

"Pros and cons

These parliamentary democracy pros and cons show us that being able to elect representatives to a government allows for voters to have a voice. It encourages compromise, while offering political stability in numerous ways."

Seems to me that the governing individuals in your country, have their debates in the public, and pretty much face to face?

Another example of public debating.

ZeusAres42

TKDB said:

@ZeusAres42

Because I'd rather debate you face to face ZeusAres42, and because in person, you can't hide behind one of your typically stated arguments, like the various responses like the ones below.

And me and YOU, debating face to face has zero to do with your lip service commentary over the "Twin Towers."


"So, debating to you is about getting one over another person?"
(Did I say the above?, NO YOU DID!)

"What exactly do you gain or learn by calling other people sad individuals?"
(Because you are sad.)

"And how is that debating?"
(Because you don't know how to debate.)

"So, it's not about learning something from rational discourse?
To you, it's all about tit for tat?
And that to you is not sad debating right?"
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

"Also, why haven't you realized that most of us here have actually have had face to face debates with people in person already? TKDB"
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

Also, I said I don't protest or oppose religion. 
And I've already explained countless times how radical beliefs can lead to harm such as terrorist acts, for instance, such as that attack on the Twin Towers remember? 
(More of your standard ZeusAres42 lip service.)

 

I was just asking you for clarity on what it is that you're saying in regard to the questions I was asking @TKDB

In regard to your previous post you asked this:

You're fooling yourself, where's YOUR LEGITIMATE evidence that Religion has caused harm to me or others?

In response to my post which was:

"Apatheist meaning I simply and generally don't care if you are religious or not (belief in a God or Not) providing that you're not following and believing in something that could cause harm to oneself or others."

But that is something we both agree on as you stated in another thread "I believe that anyone should be able to believe in Religion, as long as the participants are peaceful." https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/4383/are-some-of-the-atheists-on-the-internet-protesting-religion-in-a-fair-and-equal-way. That is also my position, so long as the participants are peaceful. I don't understand why you are asking me to provide evidence for something that we both agree on?

And you're also right. I have acted harshly and unfairly toward you. I have acted out of frustration as I have been under the impression that you might be trolling. However, in retrospect, I have thought that you may actually be being genuine, and if that is the case then I apologize as stated before. By reacting in certain ways that I have done in the past I am basically becoming the person that I do not want to be.

And in regard to your comments about be being a sad debater then I understand.  @TKDB

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

I've been peaceful the entire time, while you on the other hand been, anything but "Verbally" peaceful.

Ridicule isn't peaceful, and your condescending remarks, aren't peaceful either.

"But that is something we both agree on as you stated in another thread "I believe that anyone should be able to believe in Religion, as long as the participants are peaceful."

"That is also my position, so long as the participants are peaceful. I don't understand why you are asking me to provide evidence for something that we both agree on?"

"And you're also right. I have acted harshly and unfairly toward you. I have acted out of frustration as I have been under the impression that you might be trolling. However, in retrospect, I have thought that you may actually be being genuine, and if that is the case then I apologize as stated before. By reacting in certain ways that I have done in the past I am basically becoming the person that I do not want to be.

And in regard to your comments about be being a sad debater then I understand.  @TKDB "

Isn't the below parliamentary system how the governing individuals in your country, have debates?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_system

"A parliamentary system or parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic governance of a state where the executive derives its democratic legitimacy from its ability to command the confidence of the legislature, typically a parliament, and is also held accountable to that parliament. Wikipedia "

"Pros and cons

These parliamentary democracy pros and cons show us that being able to elect representatives to a government allows for voters to have a voice. It encourages compromise, while offering political stability in numerous ways."

Seems to me that the governing individuals in your country, have their debates in the public, and pretty much face to face?

Another example of public debating. 

TKDB

@Dee ;

Another Atheist, who wouldn't debate face to face, because debating like a Parliament does, is simply unworthy of the online debating technique, right?

****Which of the two makes for a more educational or enlightening experience?

"If you were involved neither ........"


***** And a prime example of your non public debate talk as well.

"This forum is open to and used by the public , you really are terribly "



"@TKDB

*****Your use of the word “” is stereotypical 

I agree your stupidity is widely known and fixed and it’s an oversimplified term regarding you in keeping with your simpletons mentality 

stereotypical

/stɛrɪə(ʊ)ˈtɪpɪk(ə)l,stɪərɪə(ʊ)ˈtɪpɪk(ə)l/

Learn to pronounce

adjective

adjective: stereotypical

1. relating to a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.

   "he fits the stereotypical masculine image of toughness" 

**** Debate me face to face, in person?

"You don’t debate you Troll"

****Because I challenge both of you brave souls, to say the same rhetoric to me, in public?

"Well seen as you cannot defend yourself online how would you expect to do it face to face?"

"No it’s not , it’s how Trolls are treated ....Are you going to burst out in tears .....again?"

Dee

@TKDB

***** Another Atheist, who wouldn't debate face to face

But you still don’t debate ,you never have the whole site knows you’re a Troll 

, *****because debating like a Parliament does, is simply unworthy of the online debating technique, right?

When you decide to debate let us all know in the meantime carry on Trolling 

TKDB

@Dee

Back your word's up, where's your evidence Dee?

"But you still don’t debate ,you never have the whole site knows you’re a Troll"

"When you decide to debate let us all know in the meantime carry on Trolling"


Examples of non internet based trolling rhetoric.

Abortion, is the act of trolling on a fetus.

Race on race murder.

Non race on race murder.

Those professional people who use legalized drugs, while they practice medicine, or are providing medical care to the patients around them.

Those parents who use illegal drugs, around their own kids, or families.

The terrorists who have killed innocent people, for their own deranged causes.

Real World examples of trolling, non internet based.

And the sad part is, there are people in your own country, who debate better than you do, and they are in charge, of the country you live in.

Dee

@TKDB

Hey thanks for your profile photo ......