- Joined
- Jan 20, 2014
- Messages
- 39,556
- Reaction score
- 19,153
Suggestion for the process:
0) People PM Fawlty if they are up to debate any topic
1) Fawlty publishes topic
2) People volunteer via PM to Fawlty for the specific topic. They can, if they want, volunteer to debate against their leaning.
3) Fawlty picks debate participants
4) Judge is publicly assigned and publishes his criteria in advance
5) Fawlty sends questions to participants
6) Participants send answers to Fawlty
7) Fawlty publishes initial answers without publishing poster names and tells posters whether they are first to reply
8) Posters answer via PM to Fawlty
9) Debate is declared finished at a certain point by Fawlty
10) Judge publishes verdict
11) Fawlty reveals winner and who is who.
I think the twist with the option (but not duty) to debate against one's leaning would be that you cannot tell as a judge whether the posters 'really' have that opinion or not, which makes it less likely you favor your buddies (and you don't know who they are).
Sounds good?
I like it
Fawlty looking at his semester's syllabuses and that post and saying fuck that
Last edited: