Difference between revisions of "Debate:Should the loser of debates be blocked?"
(→No) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
People who get blocked from this site are those that deliberately cause trouble, raise hate and discontent, commit vandalism, harassment, and so on. Losing a debate - as opposed to an endless debate for debate's sake - is not one of those reasons. I'd rather the price for losing a debate would be for the losing party to take their favorite lady out to dinner rather than a block. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:11, 26 May 2011 (EDT) | People who get blocked from this site are those that deliberately cause trouble, raise hate and discontent, commit vandalism, harassment, and so on. Losing a debate - as opposed to an endless debate for debate's sake - is not one of those reasons. I'd rather the price for losing a debate would be for the losing party to take their favorite lady out to dinner rather than a block. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 15:11, 26 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:OK, but what about people who repeatedly bring up debate topics purely to make people angry, rather than to actually debate something. The punishment for vandalism leaves a loophole in for debates, and don't you think we should keep people from taking advantage of that?--[[User:BriellaRollert|BriellaRollert]] 14:44, 29 May 2011 (EDT) | :OK, but what about people who repeatedly bring up debate topics purely to make people angry, rather than to actually debate something. The punishment for vandalism leaves a loophole in for debates, and don't you think we should keep people from taking advantage of that?--[[User:BriellaRollert|BriellaRollert]] 14:44, 29 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | =="Looser"?== | ||
| + | Only adds to this site's reputation for illiteracy. [[User:CasparRH|CasparRH]] 11:30, 19 July 2012 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 15:30, July 19, 2012
| ! | THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia. Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions. New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting |
|
Conservapedia has many debates, with intelligent discussion, however I think that there needs to be a rule like the 9/10 rule that says that if the original creator of a debate looses the debate, they will be blocked. Like the 9/10 rule, it is intended to keep Conservapedia from having endless discussion, and that the person who starts a debate page should think first before starting another useless debate. It will definitely cut down on the liberal troll debates that aren't really serious, but are made just to get a reaction out of people, and that is why I think this rule will succeed. Perhaps the person who starts and loses the debate shouldn't get blocked the first time, but maybe if they lose 2/3 or so of them, then they get blocked. --BriellaRollert 15:02, 26 May 2011 (EDT)
No
People who get blocked from this site are those that deliberately cause trouble, raise hate and discontent, commit vandalism, harassment, and so on. Losing a debate - as opposed to an endless debate for debate's sake - is not one of those reasons. I'd rather the price for losing a debate would be for the losing party to take their favorite lady out to dinner rather than a block. Karajou 15:11, 26 May 2011 (EDT)
- OK, but what about people who repeatedly bring up debate topics purely to make people angry, rather than to actually debate something. The punishment for vandalism leaves a loophole in for debates, and don't you think we should keep people from taking advantage of that?--BriellaRollert 14:44, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
"Looser"?
Only adds to this site's reputation for illiteracy. CasparRH 11:30, 19 July 2012 (EDT)