Personal tools
 
Views

User talk:Epte

From Debatepedia

Revision as of 23:43, 13 November 2008; Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision | Newer revision→ (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Response

Well thought out Epte. There are many things we could do with Debatepedia. Your thoughts do present some important criticisms. I disagree with you on some basic levels. We are more flexible than you may have first gathered. We allow, for instance, people to make original arguments, as long as they are Logically valid. But, we also want to document the public debate that is going on out there in the world in editorials, essays, and books. This later function is very important, and does not yet exist, as it enables the public to fully follow public debates, instead of just reading isolated editorials. Also, the purpose of Debatepedia is to allow birds-eye deliberation for people, so that they can weigh both sides of debates and draw conclusions. You ask for answers, but this is not wholly possible in the subjective realm of debate. The best alternative, in our view, is to present all the arguments in a structured format so that people can draw their own conclusions and answers. -- Brooks Lindsay 12:24, 10 November 2008 (CST)

Breadth and depth

Hi Epte, I'm not entirely sure how you would define breadth and depth. I'm assuming you mean that there is good breadth in debate articles, with many arguments and quotations, but that the depth/substance/quality/analysis of the arguments is lacking. Is that an accurate interpretation? Or, do you mean there is a breadth of articles, but little depth in each one? -- Brooks Lindsay 16:29, 13 November 2008 (CST)

Yes, we support that

The back-and-forth you describe is certainly supported on Debatepedia. And, we are very flexible medium, so adding a section on a specific argument page for "counter-arguments" is something we've done in the past and do support. I would suggest that you make some contributions along the lines that you want to see, and I will check and add to your contributions in a way more specific to your suggestions. This would be a good exercise and should add value to whatever article you choose to engage on (year-round schooling, it sounds is the best idea). -- Brooks Lindsay 17:12, 13 November 2008 (CST)

Thanks

Thanks Epte for your thoughts. It was very valuable in reminding me how to shape Debatepedia in more flexible and fluid ways, and according to the reasonable will of people like yourself. In general, the rule is that anything goes on Debatepedia that improves Debatepedia. Keep that in mind, and keep sending me feedback and criticisms so that we can keep improving our approach. All the best, -- Brooks Lindsay 17:43, 13 November 2008 (CST)

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.