Asking for opinions members have

[Stan]

What is the difference betweena

Discussion board

and a

Debate board.

and what do you think my intend was with clubadventist.com?

[GreatLakesGramma]

I think your intention was to have a discussion board, where people will respectfully discuss issues of all kinds, not a debate board where every discussion of anything the least bit controversial quickly turns into a hostile argument.

[teresaq]

well, a debate board would be, pick a side and debate it to death, but with no intentions of changing ones opinion, i think...

i think your intent was for people to be able to congregate, but i dont know you real well... :)

[Bravus]

I think you intended to create a site for discussion, and for many years that kind of activity dominated.

More recently the debating seems to have grown like kudzu and taken over the place.

Not really anyone's 'fault' - and questions about fault and blame aren't that interesting anyway.

I'd love to see the whole site return to more of a focus on discussion: and the only way that can happen is if each of us individually commits her/himself to change even if others don't. If each of us waits until others change before we do, no-one will ever change, and nothing will change.

[Bravus]

A concept we have used in online discussion forums that I have run as part of my teaching is that of 'open and critical discourse'. Let me try to explain.

Open discourse is prior, and must be established in any group prior to beginning critical discourse, if actual learning is to take place. Open discourse is an environment of safety and mutual respect, such that everyone feels safe to state their opinion, and that they will be listened to. It involves seeking to understand others' views fully through reflective questioning and close reading, without judgement. Please note that understanding a view is *not* the same as adopting it! As Aristotle said "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Only once open discourse has been established can we then move into critical discourse: the thoughtful challenging of our own and others' assumptions and perspectives, with the goal of (as fccool said so well earlier today) developing our own consciousness. Critical conversation is *not* a battle with winners and losers - in fact, if it is conducted that way, everyone loses. Rather, a critical discussion is one in which ideas - which are well understood - are tested with logic and evidence, and also against our developing beliefs and values.

Leaping into criticism of another's view before establishing open discourse leads to the kind of 'armed camps' debate that has been an unfortunate feature of this site of late.

[Gerr]

I think a good example of the difference between discussion and debate can be seen in the thread on "Rondo..." and "Disconnect". In the former, you have people coming in telling you that what you believe is all wrong. You can easily see how this immediately becomes a debate. In the latter, I believe there is a genuine desire to know the truth.

[phkrause]

I think a good example of the difference between discussion and debate can be seen in the thread on "Rondo..." and "Disconnect". In the former, you have people coming in telling you that what you believe is all wrong. You can easily see how this immediately becomes a debate. In the latter, I believe there is a genuine desire to know the truth.

I agree with most of your post Gerry. For me "debate" is not what I would call it, but than I'm not sure what I'd call it, hahahahaha

What I dislike is, I'm right your wrong attitude. And what's even more unreal is those that are like that, complain to others that that is what they do.

[Gail]

I can for hours sit at the feet of someone who has insight, is well-spoken and is courteous and displays respect.

As soon as someone becomes pushy and is not interested in what I might have to say in return, that person has lost me.

Myself, I have adverse reactions to debating.

[Cosmin M.]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=difference+between+debate+board+and+disscusion+board

[John317]

Good info, Cosmin.

[WayneV]

World English Dictionary

discussion (dɪˈskʌʃən)
—n
	the examination or consideration of a matter in speech or writing
dis'cussional
—adj

[WayneV]

World English Dictionary

debate (dɪˈbeɪt)
—n
1.	a formal discussion, as in a legislative body, in which opposing arguments are put forward
2.	discussion or dispute
3.	the formal presentation and opposition of a specific motion, followed by a vote
—vb
4.	to discuss (a motion), esp in a formal assembly
5.	to deliberate upon (something): he debated with himself whether to go
[C13: from Old French debatre to discuss, argue, from Latin battuere]
de'bater
—n

[WayneV]

In using current dictionary definitions, I must admit that no difference is readily apparent. On the other hand, my college classes discuss/debate various topics and it rarely declines into the malicious free-for-all type of discussion, which is frequently posted on these boards. The primary difference seems to be the willingness of college students to seriously LISTEN TO, UNDERSTAND, and CONSIDER the viewpoints of others.

Just my $0.02

Agape`

[Bravus]

It's true that 'debate' is probably an overgenerous term for some of what goes on.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Ahhh, sheeshteroonie and yumpin’ yiminy crickets!—not another “we’s needs more rules...” I suppose I may count on wayfarin’ Richard – soon returning with the clunk of the other dropped boot?

Wha’s the matter?—someone’s feelings got squiggled? My, my, my, whatever will we do come Tribulation!?

Nowhere in Holy Writ have I found a verse that advocates for the exchange of ideas and/or opinions by the like of buttering white bread; instead I find:

Prov 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance (as in eureka!) of his friend.

...with a greater flood of sparks testifying to greater efficaciousness.

Jesus Christ so much took the matter to heart – that He even name-called!—which, of course, we neither do nor condone.

Discussion: a bitty koffee klatch where a few ’uns – between their meanderings upon this and that, ruffle themselves, ooh and ahh, or otherwise muse – upon the pastels and patterns of the rug...

Debate: a graver discussion where interested parties, having sent out for pretzels, mustard, and suds - and having viewed the topside, turn over opposing ends of the rug and seriously contemplate the warp, woof, and knots as to their manufacture by machine or by little fingers...

In other words: Discussion is TVP. Debate is red meat. One is an exchange of recipes. The other is a vigorous exchange of greater relevancy...

Don’t know about you and your house, but mine finds that TVP contains way too many hard chemicals.

[wayfinder]

Well said jasd, you do have a way with words.

[WayneV]

QR frame:

Ahhh, sheeshteroonie and yumpin’ yiminy crickets!—not another “we’s needs more rules...” I suppose I may count on wayfarin’ Richard – soon returning with the clunk of the other dropped boot?

Wha’s the matter?—someone’s feelings got squiggled? My, my, my, whatever will we do come Tribulation!?

Nowhere in Holy Writ have I found a verse that advocates for the exchange of ideas and/or opinions by the like of buttering white bread; instead I find:

Prov 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance (as in eureka!) of his friend.

...with a greater flood of sparks testifying to greater efficaciousness.

Jesus Christ so much took the matter to heart – that He even name-called!—which, of course, we neither do nor condone.

Discussion: a bitty koffee klatch where a few ’uns – between their meanderings upon this and that, ruffle themselves, ooh and ahh, or otherwise muse – upon the pastels and patterns of the rug...

Debate: a graver discussion where interested parties, having sent out for pretzels, mustard, and suds - and having viewed the topside, turn over opposing ends of the rug and seriously contemplate the warp, woof, and knots as to their manufacture by machine or by little fingers...

In other words: Discussion is TVP. Debate is red meat. One is an exchange of recipes. The other is a vigorous exchange of greater relevancy...

Don’t know about you and your house, but mine finds that TVP contains way too many hard chemicals.

Where is the "Like" button??? STAaaaan!!! We need a "Like" button, please?

[SivartM]

Um... there's a Like button above the reply box. :)

[Bravus]

I don't think 'rules' was the goal. Can't speak for Stan, but self-control seems more like the intention. I must admit I had been wondering when one of the 'anything but all out war is for pansies' brigade would happen along...

Iron sharpens iron when wielded with care and skill: when just violently banged together it gets real blunt, real fast.

[WayneV]

Um... there's a Like button above the reply box.

Yeah, um, thanks. I did not realize that there was a FB "Like" button there. However, my desire was for a button that registered only in CA and for individual posts instead of complete threads. It is nice to know the FB button is there, though. Thanks again.

Agape`

[GreatLakesGramma]

I don't think 'rules' was the goal. Can't speak for Stan, but self-control seems more like the intention. I must admit I had been wondering when one of the 'anything but all out war is for pansies' brigade would happen along...

Iron sharpens iron when wielded with care and skill: when just violently banged together it gets real blunt, real fast.

Amen, Bravus!

Like Gail, I enjoy a good respectful discussion between opposing viewpoints, but when it deteriorates to name-calling and hostility, it is no longer worthwhile to bother reading it.

[jasd]

>>...one of the 'anything but all out war is for pansies' brigade would happen along...<< [ed.jasd]

I’d have said “girlie men” a la the Governator. That said, and

were I superstitious I’d say prophetic; however, inasmuch as I’m more the conservative – I take the above as hyperbole – but either way, I take your meaning

It may be that at times – I’m a bit sharp in my responses; however, I credit other posters with best effort and not deserving of the seeming blunt depictions – currently insinuated by the topic this thread.

Certainly, there are those rare moments when one or more posting – fail to post with the circumspection and/or subtlety desired – by one or more of present company. But, c’mon...

I’ve seen less ‘protocol’ at many a family dinner table (no reflection on the company I keep) – with no one weeping and wailing (well, rarely) because their proffered view was – stepped on.

This is much ado about nothing – nothing on the scale of an eruptive Solar Max.

I don’t read 99.9999% of the posts submitted to this forum – and I suspect it is the same with many others. Thank goodness!—that should we encounter a thread which dissatisfies or offends our senses – we have the option to move right along to another – without urgently registering that ubiquitous gripe.

The only really, really fractious problem we face is the Dems and theirs

...oh, and the Rebubs, sometimes.

[Bravus]

(just clarifying that I'm supporting etiquette in discussion, not as an end in itself - while 'nice' is, well, nice, I can get by without it - but as a way of making the discussion of ideas clearer. Imagine, if you will, the 'not really a Christian' thread without the torrents of abuse and with a focused approach to taking one topic at a time and really bringing our best ideas to it.)

I think WayneV is correct that 'discussion' and 'debate' aren't all that different: so I'm all for more debate here. Even heated debated, but abuse is just counterproductive to the purposes of debate.

[WayneV]

Like!

[Stan]

which reminds me of SO WHAT?

http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/383213/1.html