[debate] debate guidelines -- first batch

[Gadi Evron]

Alan Light wrote:
> Well, it has been kind of quiet since the suggested guidelines were 
> published.

I based them on my mistakes.

	Gadi.


>  
> I feel like I have been largely responsible for these suggested 
> guidelines, as I know I can get off-focus and a bit pedantic at times.  
> I also tend to forget that not everyone is a native English speaker - 
> though in fairness, everyone posting here is writing well enough that it 
> is not obvious.
>  
> I should note that the way my brain works and processes information is 
> based more on a coherentist model than foundationalist.  I know most of 
> y'all haven't studied epistemology (the study of how we know what we 
> know), so here's a link:
>  
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherentism
>  
> This is not exactly the norm, and while it does have some advantages, 
> the chief disadvantage is that it can seem quite perplexing to someone 
> who thinks in a more linear manner.
>  
> So, even when I stay in focus it often seems out of focus to others.
>  
> This is also one reason why I prefer informal debates to formal ones - 
> formal debates seem far too restrictive to me.  They often preclude the 
> introduction of points and data that seem important to me.
>  
> That said, I will try to keep my mind from wandering so much in future 
> debates.  I hope I haven't killed this group.
>  
>  
>  
> Alan Light
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> debate mailing list
> debate at whitestar.linuxbox.org
> http://whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/debate


-- 
Gadi Evron,
ge at linuxbox.org.

Blog: http://gevron.livejournal.com/
Security blog: http://gadievron.blogspot.com/