Who do you enjoy debating with most in WotW

In my brief time here, I have read, enjoyed, learned & at times, got angered by, several debates that rage in this very room. Out of them all, I believe this forum in particular is the hotbed of intelligence, at EoFF anyway...
Firstly, to the staff, if this is in the wrong forum, I apologise. My question is, over your time here, who have you enjoyed debating with? Who has stirred your knowledge and equalled or bettered your argument? Who consistantly comes forth with learned and informed points of view? From what I've seen here's a few of my favorite reads.

Nic0tine - Consistantly, he has always put forth intelligent, openminded posts, replies & rebuttals. I always find myself agreeing with a great deal he says & is able to say it 100 times better than I ever could.

DMKA - Despite the odd tongue-in-cheek comments, he too is able to post intelligent and open-minded views that the majority of the time, make perfect sense.

The Captain - He seems to be this place's psychiatrist, sociologist & agony-uncle rolled into one. Always seems to be able to say the right thing and the right time to people who need it.

Sasquatch - Despite being on the complete opposite end of the political spectrum as him, and disagreeing with the majority of his views, he represents the intelligent right. He knows history, puts forward learned answers & is able to fight his corner, by himself, and walk away with unscathed dignity. You don't have to be conservative, or agree with him to respect his views. Normally the hard right seem brainwashed & blind, but I am always genuinely interrested in what the opposition's view is as long as it's educated and put forward respectfully, and unlike a few others here, he does that with ease. In the words of Churchill 'Rommel, Rommel, Rommel, what else matters but beating him'.

Feedback?

i like debating with anyone really. my style of debtaing is quite controversial because my views are also. i tend to use alot of sarcasm and satire. i seem to rile people up that way which is the way i like my politics. if there is no emotion, passion or feeling in it there is no real motive for me to continue with it. i hate dead politics.

big d always proves very insightful when he pipes up.

I feel that debating with the captain is the funniest situation, the man doesn't have an opinion on anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gokufusionss1

I feel that debating with the captain is the funniest situation, the man doesn't have an opinion on anything.

---

*buzzer* wrong. Being open minded and not having an opinion are different things.
I like debating with anyone I think is smarter than me.(and thats a lot of people)

redneck susquach, and cloud 9.

Redneck and Susquach are to the right of the right. They have thought out views for the most part, and they will tear you a new one if you try to debate them without having the facts to back you. I disagree with them on some issues (mostly economic issues, I think giving a poor person a few tools to help them get out of poverty is a good idea) But on others I actaully agree with them up to a point (Most especially in the WOT).

Cloud 9. on the other hand is pretty far left. Probably closer to green than to democrat (if he's american -- I'll never understand the British system [wtf -- whigs??????]) and has some views that are downright strange. I think he's more nieve than anything else. But fun to debate.

I miss Ifrit's Bodyguard. :(

It's quite a challenge debating with a scientifically-trained creationist.

Besimudo wasn't bad either. He new his philosopy quite well, but his arguments tended to waiver between being cogent, and being a bit waffley.

Sasquatch and The Redneck are empassioned about their beliefs and views, and have obviously done their research. However, I know they're never going to move an inch, so it's not really a proper debate. I don't have the time or energy to get involved in a great deal of left vs right mudslinging, so I tend to not get too involved.

1. Dr Unne - if you've ever been in a discussion with him, you'd know why.

2. Emerald Aeris - because I know her and we argue all the time on AIM; also interested in some of the same stuff I am.

3. Big D - I've never actually debated with him, but in a recent thread he promoted a change to the US civil law system which I had been promoting for a while now, so he's awesome. :D

Who ever wants to pick a fight? My problem is that I don't post as much as I use to so what ever I have to say usually can just stand on it's own...for the most part. Or others come in and pick up the battle.

The Captain... we don't have any real disagreement. I used to think he didn't take a stance at all, but during that whole April Fool's fiasco, he proved me QUITE wrong, and earned a LOT of respect... about as much as the administration lost on that one...

Other than that, I don't debate directly alot on this. And rarely with any direct set of people... so it's hard to chose anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

and earned a LOT of respect... about as much as the administration lost on that one...

---

BURN!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skogs

It's quite a challenge debating with a scientifically-trained creationist.

---

I'm sure there are more such people around here somewhere...;)

I enjoy an intelligent debate with opponents who know the topic and know how to convey their message. Intelligence and respect earn respect in return. That having been said, the people I've debated against that would usually deserve respect would be nik0tine, udsuna, The Captain, The Redneck, often times Gnostic Yevon, and a few others. Those are the main ones I debate with that are intelligent and respectful enough to deserve return respect, although there are quite a few more that I haven't mentioned, and quite a few others (whom I shall not mention by name) that are far from intelligent concerning the topics they attempt to debate and far from respectful or earning respect.

Well, I love to debate with myself, in the end I tend to agree, although I am so intelligent sometimes I don't understand what I am saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gnostic Yevon

redneck susquach, and cloud 9.

Redneck and Susquach are to the right of the right. They have thought out views for the most part, and they will tear you a new one if you try to debate them without having the facts to back you. I disagree with them on some issues (mostly economic issues, I think giving a poor person a few tools to help them get out of poverty is a good idea) But on others I actaully agree with them up to a point (Most especially in the WOT).

Cloud 9. on the other hand is pretty far left. Probably closer to green than to democrat (if he's american -- I'll never understand the British system [wtf -- whigs??????]) and has some views that are downright strange. I think he's more nieve than anything else. But fun to debate.

---

wow those are the people i like to debate with also or atleast chalenge them to beat me without there insults added.Yeah Cloud 9 i debate with for a different reason.He's into the fad of bashing america and americans.

I generally like debating, and I used to be more active in the World Events and Eyes on Each Other forums. Unfortunately, my life has gotten a bit more hectic, and I simply don't have enough time to post as much as I'd like, nor can I keep up on the research end. It's usually fun to debate, but it becomes somewhat irritating when there's nothing but rigid inflexibility on both ends.

I like debating with many of the intelligent people on this board. On the left, there is Behold the Void, eestlinc, Udsuna, DMKA, myself, and of course, The Captain. It's always nice to have other people backing me up in an argument. Often times I am at a loss for words, or I am uninformed. There were times when I would not have been able to hold up my end of an argument without these people. Thankfully, they almost always come through and save my sorry ass. :p

The right is lacking in intelligent members (well, in reality, it is lacking in members period.) But that doesn't mean there isn't light at the end of the tunnel. We have the famous Dr. Unne who is always there to give us a peice of his mind. There is Sasquatch and The Redneck who I almost always disagree with, but they are, hands down, better debators than myself, and they tend to kick my ass quite often in a debate. But of course, none of these guys match everyones favorite right-wing fascist, Paulus Caesar. :p


Edit: Sorry if I didn't mention you. You just failed to come to my mind, thats all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skogs

I miss Ifrit's Bodyguard. :(

It's quite a challenge debating with a scientifically-trained creationist.

Besimudo wasn't bad either. He new his philosopy quite well, but his arguments tended to waiver between being cogent, and being a bit waffley.

---

I agree with both of those.

However, I get the most benefit out of debating with Shadow Nexus. We're truly at opposite ends of the spectrum - he's a Marxist anarchist, I'm a Liberal Democratic law student. However, in spite of these extreme differences in philosophy, we never argue or bicker over issues. I've learned one heck of a lot because of participating in debates that he's also involved in.

Also, we have very similar views on subjects such as military intervention and the "war on terrorism". This helps.
Shadow Nexus manages to be philisophical but also very funny, in a bitingly sarcastic way.

Skogs and The Captain are always good for some intelligent discussion. I've come to appreciate Edczxcvbnm's unique style, as well.

I enjoy debating with those who I disagree with, but only when all parties retain an open-minded and reasonable attitude. Too often, it turns into a case of "Oh, so you think that your precious [insert argument here] is right, huh? Only a stupid person would do that because it's plainly wrong, and I'm right to say this because my opinion is different to yours, which means I'm right and you're wrong".

That, I find, is pointless and petty.
A debate should always be a learning opportunity - a chance to gain undrstanding of others' views - rather than a blatant attempt to ridicule or shun those with a different perspective.

I guess I am rather leftist aren't I?

Ironically, a few days ago in a Political Affairs Club meeting (I'm the Vice-President), when we were discussing who would be representing the "against gay marriage" side, one of the new members asked why I didn't do it, since I seemed pretty conservative. I must say I found that rather amusing and perplexing at the same time.

In any event, what I dislike in the debates is the extreme unwillingness to accept anybody else's opinion. It is one thing to dissent, but it is another entirely to ignore.

PhoenixAsh. Where's he gone these days?

Quote:

---

We're truly at opposite ends of the spectrum - he's a Marxist anarchist, I'm a Liberal Democratic law student.

---

Um...no, wait, you can't be a Marxist and an anarchist at the same time. If I ever claimed to be a marxist it was only for the sake of provocation. Orthodox marxism or anarchism falls into dogmatism, and my favourite sport is to kung-fu kick dogmatic people in the face. Example:

Dogmarxist: Socialism is the natural evolution of capitalism and it will get here no matter what, the working classes will rebel and we will install a new system of equality and freedom.

Shad: What makes you think such rebellion is necessary- as in inevitable, not as in beneficial- and not just a mere supposition done by the fallacious idea of some weak relation between causes and effects?

Dogmarxist: It will happen, Marx said so.

Shad: HIYAAAAAAA!!! *kick in the face*

Another possible reply if the dogmarxist is a hot girl is "Do you make love to all the Bolshevik brothers? No? Then I'm not intersted*".

Um, seriously, I don't like labels. It feels constricting, as soon as we get labeled people put us in ideological boxes. Sometimes I try to make an experiment, I just present myself as a right winged person and then go on with my normal opinions, but always insisting on the fact that I am a right winged man. Of course, people feel confused, but still keep believing I am right winged. Thats what stereotypes do to you. If people ignored such labels, thinking would be more free, because you would not feel nearly forced to agree with some precepts of some ideology just because you agree with the other 90%, just to match. True, I agree with many marxist and anarchist concepts, but I don't consider myself neither of them. If you want a lable, "cynical guy with a trench coat and who really is a frustrated romantic" kinda suits me, or thats how most of my friends see me.

And I also enjoy discussing with you, but I don't feel like adding much to this post. I just don't like this kind of topics, it looks like some kind of popularity contest of some sort. "Oh my God, they didn't mention me in this post....oh no, I need attention now, so....TIME FOR A SUICIDE THREAD!!!"

* No, I don't actually kick people in the face. I did say the bolshevik thing once, thanks God the girl has sense of humour and didn't kick me in the balls.

Another thing I dislike is when people actually attempt to conform to a stereotype, that's just kinda sad.

i do hate being called niave. i consider myself very well read and educated (well compared to others round here (not the forum where i live)) and in fact tend to be extremely cynical about all things. and my dislike of america is not a fad (been done for decades) and i have given reasoned arguments for doing so. (we are not starting that topic om this thread) anyway i don't believe this thread should be used for put downs it is a positive thread regarding who you enjoy debating with for positive reasons.

never considered myself a very green party man either (unless it means something else is america) my support lies with the liberal democrats (where the whigs in a way) which are not overly left wing.

sorry for going off topic there but it seemed the time and place to do so.

I hate debating.
I hate reading all those long paragraphs.
I'm also very stupid. And, although I can sometimes put up a good ruse, most people see through my shallow barricade of sarcasm and pointedly razor sharp wit to find that whatever I say is rooted more in real life than intellectual fantasy.

I'm driven by anger and experience more than news reports (Which I always find as biased in some way or another), so most of the time people discard all of my asinine comments. And that's exactly what people should do.

But I remember debating the weed issue with Opium. I'd say that that was... No fun at all. Not the slightest bit.

I only like debating religion because I know I'm right, but I try not to because my proof is, apparently, invalid. As it is in most cases. People fear us right wing extremists, ya know.

In fact, the next time I debate and somebody pulls out some evidence, I'm just going to say that that doesn't count. It works against me, it'll work against them! HAHAHA!

Note: If anybody has anything to say that attacks this particular post, be forewwarned that whatever evidence you propose means NOTHING at all! I need statistics, short stories, links to VALID news sites, and, if your av is FF, it's gotta be pre-FFVII or else I don't value your opinion anyway!

Oh darn. :(

I don't know when this turned into a "so and so is such a smart guy, give him a medal" thread, but let's get back to the point. I like to pull out the fallacies in EVERYbody's arguments because it makes me feel powerful.

In all seriousness though, I don't like to "debate" as much as I like to "discuss". The moment someone starts raving like a banshee and insulting other members and their arguments is the moment I start to lose respect for them. SO, I guess that means I don't have a favorite pickin' partner.

Oh darn x2.

Quote:

---

I only like debating religion because I know I'm right, but I try not to because my proof is, apparently, invalid. As it is in most cases. People fear us right wing extremists, ya know.

---

I am very curious to know what exactly you call a valid point in reference to religion. I seriously doubt you can make any dogmas around the metaphisical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow Nexus

Quote:

---

I only like debating religion because I know I'm right, but I try not to because my proof is, apparently, invalid. As it is in most cases. People fear us right wing extremists, ya know.

---

I am very curious to know what exactly you call a valid point in reference to religion. I seriously doubt you can make any dogmas around the metaphisical.

---

Well, no. I can't. I've never actually tried.
I just like saying that I'm always right, and I don't like it when people question my authority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martyr

I just like saying that I'm always right, and I don't like it when people question my authority.

---

I suppose that's sarcasm. Although I don't know, after reading some of your posts I can believe anyhting :D

Pacifists, I love making thier hearts curl with my in-hummanity.

Infact I have had several members compare me to Stalin. Which I take as a compliment. :radred:

I love debating with anyone who doesnt share my view.