Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]  All

Author Topic: A place for more moderated discussion  (Read 12585 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

pingpongsam

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1749
  • Shuffle iT Username: pingpongsam
  • Respect: +774
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #100 on: November 11, 2015, 09:07:44 am »
+3

Logged
You are the brashest scum player on f.ds.

Haddock

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 725
  • Shuffle iT Username: Haddock
  • Doc Cod
  • Respect: +553
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #101 on: November 11, 2015, 09:18:18 am »
+2

Oh for the days when I only had Intrigue, and Ironworks-Great-Hall-Scout "engines" felt insanely powerful.
Logged
The best reason to lynch Haddock is the meltdown we get to witness on the wagon runup. I mean, we should totally wagon him every day just for the lulz.

M Town Wins-Losses (6-2, 75%): 71, 72, 76, 81, 83, 87 - 79, 82.  M Scum Wins-Losses (2-1, 67%): 80, 101 - 70.
RMM Town Wins-Losses (3-1, 75%): 42, 47, 49 - 31.  RMM Scum Wins-Losses (3-3, 50%): 33, 37, 43 - 29, 32, 35.
Modded: M75, M84, RMM38.     Mislynched (M-RMM): None - 42.     Correctly lynched (M-RMM): 101 - 33, 33, 35.       MVPs: RMM37, M87

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9146
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #102 on: November 11, 2015, 01:14:04 pm »
+3

5. But no seriously, it's bad. Like, it has +1 Action, you would think, how can a cantrip be the worst card? But it's still the worst card, in spite of that +1 action. I'm actually coming around to it being worse than Transmute.

Scout isn't a cantrip because it doesn't draw.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5258
  • Respect: +2708
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #103 on: November 11, 2015, 11:16:36 pm »
+1

Also, as to the actual topic of the thread, I appreciate the concerns with people not wanting to splinter discussion.  I still don't see what the problem is with labeling a thread [Serious], then relying both on our good faith to not post "can't all be the best moat ever" while reporting any posts that violate that request.  We could start by trying out a [Serious] General Discussion thread.
What will happen is, someone will think something is a reasonable reply (like, "but there's no way to see their rating, so what you ask is not possible"), and someone else will not think it is reasonable, and unless your decision as a moderator is "oops [serious] doesn't actually mean anything" then you are hurting the forums. If it became a common thing then people would start another site, say "dominionsalvation," where they wouldn't have to deal with that nonsense.

Man, I was thinking about that place every other AdamH post I read in here.  The style in which it finally got a direct mention really cracked me up.

Love you to death Donald.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Kfm

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: A place for more moderated discussion
« Reply #104 on: November 13, 2015, 03:23:32 am »
+1

Yuma proposed a cool idea.  Let's do it.
A dominion debate, in which, two people ( lets call them Fets and Cim) meet together in a thread to debate, let's say "which card is better." Both forum members are assigned a side and then need to follow the rules of debate to try and demonstrate their side

I'll propose a format.   Please guide me where to post this proposal if there's a more appropriate place.

Please see the debate format below.  I'm sure there are problems with the proposed format, including the incredibly bland topic statement and choices. I would be happy to have suggestions, though I hope to avoid lengthy permutations of format discussions before trying out a debate. 

Is anyone else interested to see a debate like this happen? Also, please call out or PM me if you'd be willing to be the debater for either side (but don't start marking arguments on either side yet please).
 
Possibly the correct answer to the topic question is obvious, and then I get to be embarrassed for suggesting it, and we can pick something else.  I was trying to create something clearly defined, with the added benefit that we can check simulations.   

A post at the top of the debate thread will introduce the debate, list the debate rules/format and schedule, and the request that people other than the debaters not post in the thread before the end of the debate.

Debate Format:
Each of two debaters will write opposing posts at an agreed time (scouts honor not to read the other post first) beginning with
"In a 2 player Province and Estates game, where 'Rabbles Buyer' can buy no kingdom cards other than Rabbles, and 'Ghost Ships Buyer' can buy no kingdom cards other than Ghost Ships.  I would choose to be Rabbles/Ghost Ships buyer because:  ..."

The post is expected to contain only formatted text.  Maximum 2000 characters.

Each debater has one hour to write a rebuttal post, also max 2000 characters, to refute the post of the opposing debater, and otherwise support his argument as he/she see fit.

Debate Posts may not include simulation results (but these will be included in post-debate discussion).

After 1 hour has passed from the scheduled debate time, or both debaters have posted rebuttals, others can (will hopefully) start posting in the thread, and those posts can be further arguments on either side, discussion of the good and bad arguments, who articulated their argument more effectively overall, or pictures of otters.

At or near this time, a related poll will be opened (open for 48 hours), and linked in the thread, which will determine the winner of the debate.  The poll choices are:
- I'd buy only Rabbles over only Ghost Ships, and the Rabble argument was more effective at influencing my opinion (Credit Rabbles Debater)
- I'd still buy only Rabbles over only Ghost Ships, but the Rabble argument was not more effective or I have no opinion on the effectiveness of the arguments (Credit Ghost Ship Debater)
- I'd buy only Ghost Ships over only Rabbles, and the Ghost Ship argument was more effective (Credit Ghost Ship Debater)
- I'd still buy only Ghost Ships over only Rabbles, but the Ghost Ship argument was less effective or I have no opinion on the effectiveness of the arguments (Credit Rabbles Debater)
- I still don't know which I would choose, but the Rabble argument was more effective (Credit Rabbles Debater)
- I still don't know which I would choose, but Ghost Ship argument was more effective (Credit Ghost Ship Debater)
- I still don't know which I would choose, and both arguments were ineffective or I don't know which argument was more effective
« Last Edit: November 13, 2015, 04:12:43 am by Kfm »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]  All
 

Page created in 0.089 seconds with 21 queries.