Debate on Fire Emblem debating

[Florete]

The two main topics I've seen where this happened was the Titania topic (which was for debating anyway), and the Which Pegasus Knight did you LIKE topic. You might think that a statement "Rolf is good", is an opinion. But, well, several things.

One, it's stated as a fact. Nothing there necessarily implies it's an opinion. Obviously however, the context has a pretty massive effect.

Two, just because it's an opinion that Rolf is good, doesn't mean my opinion can't be wrong. If I said "I like Rolf" or "I like Rolf because", then I can't really be wrong, can I? But if my opinion is that 2+2=7, then my opinion is wrong. Etc.

Now, for the main "problem" thread. A lot of things in that thread where stated like I outlined before. Now, the title might have said "Which one do you like?", but if I ask someone which car company they like and they say "GM is BETTER", it doesn't really matter what the question was, they're saying GM is better. Now, let's look what happened once the debating started:

SS initiated a debate based on their statements, statements that would appear to be statements of "X character is better"

Now, let's see the first response to SS:

The Titania topic was a split topic. It was taken from a topic where it had started because it was completely off-topic. So that one started again, as a result of someone challenging another where it was unneeded. Not pointing fingers, because I don't really remember who initiated that one.

Opinions cannot be wrong. I don't understand what you're missing there. 2+2=7 is a false statement, not an opinion. "Rolf is good" isn't exactly an opinion or factualized statement by itself, but I would think most people would generally see it as an opinion. Plus, I don't think anyone said it so bluntly. Whenever anyone said it, I do believe it was said in a more opinionated way. But that goes back to Ronan's Bikeshed metaphor; Just because you can prove your way to be better, doesn't mean you absolutely need to.

i had refrained from posting in this thread, but enough is enough

this is getting ridiculous.

you are too busy blaming each other that you don't even think about the problem

did you know that in a discussion it takes TWO? perhaps not, seeing that everybody blames the other side instead of realizing and accepting their own mistakes and try to fix them. and this goes to both debaters and non-debators.

so toodles! and don't even bother to respond to this message, since i'm not coming back to this thread.

I thought about that before reading this and I know it's true, but I think it's too involved now to just come to a halt.

Also, we try never to be arrogant jerks. You guys are trying to have your cake and eat it too. Want to be able to state what you like and dislike? Fine, we CAN'T argue that. Want to state what you think is good or bad? Fine, but we can argue that fine. The problem comes when you try to state what's good or bad and say we shouldn't argue it.

I guess what I'm getting at, is that I don't think hiding behind opinion is a valid argument.

Either way, we seriously cannot debate without an opponent. It won't work. One of the reasons I came here was to find new debaters, and new opinions and blood. I ENJOYED the Titania vs Rolf debate. Because most other places everyone is already used to the established idea that Titania>Rolf.

Hiding behind opinion? That's laughable. I guess all I'm doing here is hiding, because I'm full of opinions, as is everyone else.

You came here for debaters? Here? When there are other places that (I believe) are full of debates and they actually like it? Places they don't have to debate about debates? Okay...

I know it didn't look it, but I, personally, was only trying to show that Rolf isn't just a horrible character. I would rather not compare him to Titania.

[CGV]

ok, seriously ZXValaRevan, using that FE8 peg knight topic against us is stupid. It says "which do you like more" in two different places which means it's solely an opinion topic. No one put "IMO" or "I think so and so is better because..." because the whole thing is an opinionated topic. If I said "Tana is the best" I know it looks like just a statement to debate, but look at the topic it's in. It shouldn't matter what we say there. It's and OPINIONATED topic so all posts are considered opinions no matter what they say unless specified

Besides, I said she is usually a bit more reliable because she turns out better for me (I regret not putting that), I never said she was better

That's just the way I see things, I don't know about anyone else

Vincent, care to shed some light on the current situation?

Edited October 7, 2008 by CGV

[Defeatist Elitist]

<_<... This isn't going anywhere, is it. I'd try to end this with "truce", but that would only result in "lulz debaters win, fatality".

So, you guys OBVIOUSLY don't get what I'm saying. We're( at least I am) fine with you debating. We're NOT ok with you stomping on our ideas. You cannot say it has not been done, for it has on multiple occasions. You can state your "facts" as much as you want. I like to hear your views. But they always seem so tricking arrogant and forceful, causing dislike. WHY CAN'T YOU GUYS SEE THAT( well, Tino has...)! Why can there be no mingling!? I've seen peaceful debates, so why not just make all of them like that?

Look, so far, I actually have not initiated ANY debates. I've only jumped in on ones that have been started by others, and then mainly in order to defend the concept of debating. I see you're fine with debating. And I personally don't think we're stomping all over your ideas. Unless by stomping all over your ideas, you mean proving them wrong, and well then, isn't that kind of the point of discussion/debate? I mean, we haven't insulted you or anything for your likes and dislikes. We've just said, "X character is good/bad for Y reason". There can be mingling, in fact everywhere else debates are totally peaceful. The only times they aren't is when people start whining about them. Sometimes they may seem arrogant, but usually that's because of a joke, or because we're just debating.

The Titania topic was a split topic. It was taken from a topic where it had started because it was completely off-topic. So that one started again, as a result of someone challenging another where it was unneeded. Not pointing fingers, because I don't really remember who initiated that one.

Opinions cannot be wrong. I don't understand what you're missing there. 2+2=7 is a false statement, not an opinion. "Rolf is good" isn't exactly an opinion or factualized statement by itself, but I would think most people would generally see it as an opinion. Plus, I don't think anyone said it so bluntly. Whenever anyone said it, I do believe it was said in a more opinionated way. But that goes back to Ronan's Bikeshed metaphor; Just because you can prove your way to be better, doesn't mean you absolutely need to.

I thought about that before reading this and I know it's true, but I think it's too involved now to just come to a halt.

Hiding behind opinion? That's laughable. I guess all I'm doing here is hiding, because I'm full of opinions, as is everyone else.

You came here for debaters? Here? When there are other places that (I believe) are full of debates and they actually like it? Places they don't have to debate about debates? Okay...

I know it didn't look it, but I, personally, was only trying to show that Rolf isn't just a horrible character. I would rather not compare him to Titania.

Alright, maybe we're not understanding opinions right here.

You've said that "2 plus 2 is 7" is a false statement, not an opinion, but "Rolf is good" is an opinion? The structure of words is almost identical. What if I said "Crabs are responsible for nuclear warfare"? See what I mean. And to the bike shed metaphor, simply put, we enjoy it, and it usually is constructive.

What I mean by hiding behind opinion is this:

I often argue with people. I might say I am something of an expert. Often, people who I argue with will say something, and then say "HA! IT'S MY OPINION, NOTHING YOU CAN SAY CAN PROVE ME WRONG!". Now, if you say "In my opinion, 2+2= 7", then your opinion is wrong. If you say "2+2=7" it's not even an opinion. Etc.

Now, honestly, all I ask is that people stop complaining about debates. I (and hopefully Tino and SS), will try to keep our debating in some threads, but it's kind of hard to not try to engage someone in a debate when they say things like "best" or whatever. It's like someone dangling a carrot in front of our noses. :D

PS. The Titania topic was not really anyone's fault, but it WAS a debate topic, if I can see one. Tino stated in passing in the "Laguz Band" topic that their where enough broken characters in the game without the Laguz Band being useable by Reyson, and one of the characters he listed was Titania. Someone quoted him and said "Since when is Titania broken in PoR", etc. That is, without a doubt, an invitation for debate.

[CGV]

Nope. None of us are going to come to an agreement here (gee, what a surprise)

But did any of you agree with my post (#64) about all this? none of you debaters responded to it, so that's what I'm guessing

strikethrough is fun

[Defeatist Elitist]

ok, seriously ZXValaRevan, using that FE8 peg knight topic against us is stupid. It says "which do you like more" in two different places which means it's solely an opinion topic. No one put "IMO" or "I think so and so is better because..." because the whole thing is an opinionated topic. If I said "Tana is the best" I know it looks like just a statement to debate, but look at the topic it's in. It shouldn't matter what we say there. It's and OPINIONATED topic so all posts are considered opinions no matter what they say unless specified

Besides, I said she is usually a bit more reliable because she turns out better for me (I regret not putting that), I never said she was better

That's just the way I see things, I don't know about anyone else

And that's why I was posting here. Again, if I say "Which Console do you like more?" and you say "Wii is better", it doesn't make it your unbeatable opinion. There is a very distinct difference between liking something and saying/thinking it's good. Etc.

So, does that mean that since SS posted in that topic, that was assumed to be his opinion, and thus he couldn't be wrong? Because I could use the same logic against you. Again, the question doesn't excuse the answer.

[Liz]

Look, so far, I actually have not initiated ANY debates. I've only jumped in on ones that have been started by others, and then mainly in order to defend the concept of debating. I see you're fine with debating. And I personally don't think we're stomping all over your ideas. Unless by stomping all over your ideas, you mean proving them wrong, and well then, isn't that kind of the point of discussion/debate? I mean, we haven't insulted you or anything for your likes and dislikes. We've just said, "X character is good/bad for Y reason". There can be mingling, in fact everywhere else debates are totally peaceful. The only times they aren't is when people start whining about them. Sometimes they may seem arrogant, but usually that's because of a joke, or because we're just debating.

Alright, maybe we're not understanding opinions right here.

You've said that "2 plus 2 is 7" is a false statement, not an opinion, but "Rolf is good" is an opinion? The structure of words is almost identical. What if I said "Crabs are responsible for nuclear warfare"? See what I mean. And to the bike shed metaphor, simply put, we enjoy it, and it usually is constructive.

What I mean by hiding behind opinion is this:

I often argue with people. I might say I am something of an expert. Often, people who I argue with will say something, and then say "HA! IT'S MY OPINION, NOTHING YOU CAN SAY CAN PROVE ME WRONG!". Now, if you say "In my opinion, 2+2= 7", then your opinion is wrong. If you say "2+2=7" it's not even an opinion. Etc.

Now, honestly, all I ask is that people stop complaining about debates. I (and hopefully Tino and SS), will try to keep our debating in some threads, but it's kind of hard to not try to engage someone in a debate when they say things like "best" or whatever. It's like someone dangling a carrot in front of our noses. :D

PS. The Titania topic was not really anyone's fault, but it WAS a debate topic, if I can see one. Tino stated in passing in the "Laguz Band" topic that their where enough broken characters in the game without the Laguz Band being useable by Reyson, and one of the characters he listed was Titania. Someone quoted him and said "Since when is Titania broken in PoR", etc. That is, without a doubt, an invitation for debate.

the main problem with the debate topics is that debaters make their statements as irrefutable. many people here either don't really care about the FE debating standards or have a different standard for judging characters.

you should understand that these people think that way, and not completely stomp their ideas. there are different ways of phrasing things, and the one that has been used by debaters hasn't been a friendly one. and remember, this isn't a debating forum yet, so people are not quite used to having full-fledged debates in here.

non-debaters should really not take to personally all of the debate topics. get all of the information provided on the debates and use it to your advantage if you want, or just accept that others have a different idea of units. and don't flame when someone challenges your opinion, that won't be of much use.

Edited October 7, 2008 by Anna the Tutorial Girl

[Defeatist Elitist]

the main problem with the debate topics is that debaters make their statements as irrefutable. many people here either don't really care about the FE debating standards or have a different standard for judging characters.

you should understand that these people think that way, and not completely stomp their ideas. this isn't a debating forum yet, so people are not quite used to having full-fledged debates in here.

non-debaters should really not take to personally all of the debate topics. get all of the information provided on the debates and use it to your advantage if you want, or just accept that others have a different idea of units.

Well, when you debate you aren't very likely to attack your own position, or admit it's weakpoints unless someone else actually gets them, right? The point is generally to argue your character to "victory".

I know a lot of people think differently, and are not fully ready for debates. This is why most of the time I post, it is to explain debating, and debating standards. Not only that, but I try to explain WHY we have them, HOW we get them, etc.

Would you like me to post that information here, and hopefully clear things up?

[CGV]

And that's why I was posting here. Again, if I say "Which Console do you like more?" and you say "Wii is better", it doesn't make it your unbeatable opinion. There is a very distinct difference between liking something and saying/thinking it's good. Etc.

So, does that mean that since SS posted in that topic, that was assumed to be his opinion, and thus he couldn't be wrong? Because I could use the same logic against you. Again, the question doesn't excuse the answer.

I got a feeling this wont sink in, but...

of course it's MY unbeatable opinion because it's what I think. If I think Wii is the best (which I do) then that only pertains to ME and no one else. If you don't think that the Wii is the best, I wouldn't care. Seriously, if you said something like "PS3 is the best" I honestly wouldn't care because it's what YOU think. No problems with that

Yes, for me anyway it was assumed to be an opinion (I can't remember the post though)

Nope, he can't be wrong for what he thinks because it's what he thinks

And I'll regret asking this, but why does the question not excuse the answer? If it sounds like an opinionated question, shouldn't the answer be assumed opinionated even though it might look like a statement?

procrastination sucks

[DeSu]

ZXVR, you've made some valid points. But we only attack( usually) when we feel people are just trying to shoot us down. Look at how me and Fox talked about Wil and Rebecca in the sniper topic in this forum. That's a good way to do things. More could have been said, but you get the picture of what we want? Maybe it would be less debate and more compare/contrast.

[CGV]

ZXVR, you've made some valid points. But we only attack( usually) when we feel people are just trying to shoot us down. Look at how me and Fox talked about Wil and Rebecca in the sniper topic in this forum. That's a good way to do things. More could have been said, but you get the picture of what we want? Maybe it would be less debate and more compare/contrast

I rate this line 10 out of 10

strikethrough still kicks ass!

[Florete]

We're not seeing eye-to-eye. Pretty much everything I say about Fire Emblem is my opinion, unless it's an obvious fact like "Titania can use axes." "Rolf is good," though I did say it isn't a completely opinionated statement in itself, neither is it someone claiming that this is absolute truth. I would see it as opinion, as would many others at this forum. You debaters see it as a challenge, and it's just annoying to have our opinions challenged.

Did you completely understand the Bikeshed metaphor? I can't be sure you did, so I'll expand, using Tana as blue and Vanessa as green:

Raven wants to paint his bikeshed blue because he thinks that's the best color for it. You think green is the best color, and you can provide substantial evidence as to why that is so. Does this mean you should? No, it doesn't. It will likely only serve to annoy him because you're telling him that his idea on how to do this is wrong.

Thus, the argument starts. The debater says Vanessa is better, and the more casual player thinks Tana is. Which side is wrong here? Answer: NEITHER. Why is this? People do things differently, people have different experiences, and out views on the world are shaped by those experiences. You think because you can give more evidence as to why Vanessa is better that that makes it a fact, but Raven can reasonably think otherwise. What you may consider a good reason, Raven may easily think is a bad reason.

Take supports, for example; these are a HUGE, HUGE thing that show up in debates. What is really better: A character that's amazing without supports, or a character that's great with supports? I say the former. Thus, I think supports alone aren't enough to make a character a truly good character, and that they shouldn't be such a huge deal in debates. Definitely considerable, but not a defining argument. That can change an opinion right there.

Lastly, go ahead and debate all you want, I don't care. But if someone states something you don't agree with in something that isn't obviously a debate topic, something that can easily just be opinion even if it isn't exactly worded so, think of the bikeshed and please don't go challenging it out of the blue. There are cases where an argument is being called for, though. If someone said "Priscilla sucks, no one should use her" I would attack that person until I had him or her on the ground begging for mercy. But if someone says "I don't like Priscilla, she's not that good" I'd likely just skip over it and let it be, unless that was the first post in the topic, in which it's obviously asking for a reply.

P.S. Priscilla is my favorite Fire Emblem character.

[Defeatist Elitist]

ZXVR, you've made some valid points. But we only attack( usually) when we feel people are just trying to shoot us down. Look at how me and Fox talked about Wil and Rebecca in the sniper topic in this forum. That's a good way to do things. More could have been said, but you get the picture of what we want? Maybe it would be less debate and more compare/contrast.

But the way you guys are talking will rarely discover the superior character. The point of debating is to create a list of characters, from best to worst. We USUALLY compare and contrast, but on a far larger scale, and with conclusions thrown in. Mind if I try in that Archer thread to show you how I personally would go about that debate? Or should we make a new thread, Rebecca vs Will, in a one on one type thing, or something. I'll try to avoid things like "shooting your opinion down", but I would appreciate you pointing it out when I do it.

[Liz]

Well, when you debate you aren't very likely to attack your own position, or admit it's weakpoints unless someone else actually gets them, right? The point is generally to argue your character to "victory".

I know a lot of people think differently, and are not fully ready for debates. This is why most of the time I post, it is to explain debating, and debating standards. Not only that, but I try to explain WHY we have them, HOW we get them, etc.

Would you like me to post that information here, and hopefully clear things up?

there is actually a thread, i believe, but feel free to do it.

and about the debate things, there is a difference between proving your point and completely disregard other people's opinion and state that you are right.

i am in favor of debates, just as long as EVERYONE is civil and respectful of other people's opinions.

i haven't actually have anything to complain about you, your posts have been very civil in that respect. however, there have been other members who have disregarded other people's opinions and blatantly stated that only they are correct. they may have provided evidence to back up their claim, but that still doesn't justify the attack towards non-debaters.

as i've said before, debate is good as long as its done civil, without disrespecting other people's opinion. posts like "_____ sucks because ___________ and because you can't prove me wrong i win" are completely distasteful.

instead of that, maybe they could post something like this:

"____________ isn't a good unit because _____________"

phrasing goes a long way towards making a debate sensible and friendly.

[Defeatist Elitist]

We're not seeing eye-to-eye. Pretty much everything I say about Fire Emblem is my opinion, unless it's an obvious fact like "Titania can use axes." "Rolf is good," though I did say it isn't a completely opinionated statement in itself, neither is it someone claiming that this is absolute truth. I would see it as opinion, as would many others at this forum. You debaters see it as a challenge, and it's just annoying to have our opinions challenged.

Did you completely understand the Bikeshed metaphor? I can't be sure you did, so I'll expand, using Tana as blue and Vanessa as green:

Raven wants to paint his bikeshed blue because he thinks that's the best color for it. You think green is the best color, and you can provide substantial evidence as to why that is so. Does this mean you should? No, it doesn't. It will likely only serve to annoy him because you're telling him that his idea on how to do this is wrong.

Thus, the argument starts. The debater says Vanessa is better, and the more casual player thinks Tana is. Which side is wrong here? Answer: NEITHER. Why is this? People do things differently, people have different experiences, and out views on the world are shaped by those experiences. You think because you can give more evidence as to why Vanessa is better that that makes it a fact, but Raven can reasonably think otherwise. What you may consider a good reason, Raven may easily think is a bad reason.

Take supports, for example; these are a HUGE, HUGE thing that show up in debates. What is really better: A character that's amazing without supports, or a character that's great with supports? I say the former. Thus, I think supports alone aren't enough to make a character a truly good character, and that they shouldn't be such a huge deal in debates. Definitely considerable, but not a defining argument. That can change an opinion right there.

Lastly, go ahead and debate all you want, I don't care. But if someone states something you don't agree with in something that isn't obviously a debate topic, something that can easily just be opinion even if it isn't exactly worded so, think of the bikeshed and please don't go challenging it out of the blue. There are cases where an argument is being called for, though. If someone said "Priscilla sucks, no one should use her" I would attack that person until I had him or her on the ground begging for mercy. But if someone says "I don't like Priscilla, she's not that good" I'd likely just skip over it and let it be, unless that was the first post in the topic, in which it's obviously asking for a reply.

P.S. Priscilla is my favorite Fire Emblem character.

I see what you're saying, and though I don't totally agree, I think maybe I have a compromise.

Maybe then, if the topic is not an obvious debate, and one of us sees something we would debate, we should post something like "Would you consider debating this?" or "Do you mind if I give an argument?", and perhaps make a new thread? That seems good with me.

@ Anna: Agreed, and I will do my best to keep things like that.

Edited October 7, 2008 by ZXValaRevan

[Florete]

But the way you guys are talking will rarely discover the superior character. The point of debating is to create a list of characters, from best to worst. We USUALLY compare and contrast, but on a far larger scale, and with conclusions thrown in. Mind if I try in that Archer thread to show you how I personally would go about that debate? Or should we make a new thread, Rebecca vs Will, in a one on one type thing, or something. I'll try to avoid things like "shooting your opinion down", but I would appreciate you pointing it out when I do it.

Point being: We don't care! I think Rebecca is better, he thinks Wil is better. I'm not challenging him on it, because what he thinks, though I respect it, won't really have an affect on how I play the game. Who CARES who the "truly superior" character is, considering there even is one? I'm not about to say "By this logic, this character is better, so I'll use him/her instead." I shape my opinions on characters based on what I've seen them do, not something I can look up on the internet. Does this matter to anyone else? NO, and I don't expect it to.

[Defeatist Elitist]

Point being: We don't care! I think Rebecca is better, he thinks Wil is better. I'm not challenging him on it, because what he thinks, though I respect it, won't really have an affect on how I play the game. Who CARES who the "truly superior" character is, considering there even is one? I'm not about to say "By this logic, this character is better, so I'll use him/her instead." I shape my opinions on characters based on what I've seen them do, not something I can look up on the internet. Does this matter to anyone else? NO, and I don't expect it to.

Sorry, that wasn't my intention. He said that was a demonstration of your method of arguing. I said that that doesn't really work for me for the stated reason. Then I asked if I could show how I would do it, but in a thread where everyone had really agreed to it, and no-one would feel bad, since I think all the earlier threads had that problem.

EDIT: But would you agree to my proposition? I think that it makes both sides pretty happy. Non debaters can just say "No thank you, I'm not really interested", and people who are interested can have fun debating.

Edited October 7, 2008 by ZXValaRevan

[DeSu]

Yes, that works. Btw, feel free to debate-ify my sniper thread.

The forest may finally be at peace!?! We should make an epic story about it.

[CGV]

Yes, that works. Btw, feel free to debate-ify my sniper thread.

The forest may finally be at peace!?! We should make an epic story about it.

Let's see what Tino and SS think about it. I'm sure they'll be cool with it

[Defeatist Elitist]

Yes, that works. Btw, feel free to debate-ify my sniper thread.

The forest may finally be at peace!?! We should make an epic story about it.

Actually, I'm thinking of making a separate thread, so as not to disturb the people in the first one.

[Florete]

I see what you're saying, and though I don't totally agree, I think maybe I have a compromise.

Maybe then, if the topic is not an obvious debate, and one of us sees something we would debate, we should post something like "Would you consider debating this?" or "Do you mind if I give an argument?", and perhaps make a new thread? That seems good with me.

@ Anna: Agreed, and I will do my best to keep things like that.

This could work. I've done it myself in the past. Instead of shooting an opinion down, I say something like "That's highly debatable" which is my of saying "I don't agree and would challenge that" without any malice.

Sorry, that wasn't my intention. He said that was a demonstration of your method of arguing. I said that that doesn't really work for me for the stated reason. Then I asked if I could show how I would do it, but in a thread where everyone had really agreed to it, and no-one would feel bad, since I think all the earlier threads had that problem.

If you made a new thread, fine. It would be a thread specifically for debating. I might involve myself, I might not, as I really don't care what the conclusion would be because it won't change my view on the matter.

[DeSu]

Tino is already starting to use that format. SS is another story...

[Defeatist Elitist]

Tino is already starting to use that format. SS is another story...

I'm sure SS will agree. You guys might not know, but SS is probably one of the nicest people I've ever seen. I will say with confidence that he is WAY nicer than I will ever be.

[Tino]

I think that's a good solution, yes.

[Liz]

nice that we could finally get a good ending!

i love happy endings!

[canas is back]

enven though I'm not a big time debater like tino or SS (they've been doing it since they were born) I agree with vala's proposition, and suggest that anything big enough be put into a debate board.