Comments for Constructive Debate http://www.constructivedebateblog.com A neutral voice promoting a healthier discourse -- locally and globally Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:51:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.1 Comment on Rules of Engagement by Bill http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/rules-of-engagement/#comment-1212 Bill Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:51:44 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/#comment-1212 You left out one of the most important rules. The moderator, for instance in the upcoming next presidential debate, is king, and if you break any of the rules you should expect the moderator to step up and enforce them, even to the disappointment and maybe even anger of one of sides in the debate. And as the moderator, if you aren't comfortable with that you should pass on the opportunity to someone who is willing to do so. Far to often people are given freedom to break these rules while the moderator sit's helplessly by out of fear of losing their job. I don't care if your the president or his opponent, these debates aren't for you to proselytize your views or play cat and mouse with your opponent. They are to answer truthfully and in detail the questions that have been chosen so the people can get a real picture of your policies. That's the moderators job and as far as i'm concerned. it's the most important one during any debate. You left out one of the most important rules. The moderator, for instance in the upcoming next presidential debate, is king, and if you break any of the rules you should expect the moderator to step up and enforce them, even to the disappointment and maybe even anger of one of sides in the debate. And as the moderator, if you aren’t comfortable with that you should pass on the opportunity to someone who is willing to do so.

Far to often people are given freedom to break these rules while the moderator sit’s helplessly by out of fear of losing their job. I don’t care if your the president or his opponent, these debates aren’t for you to proselytize your views or play cat and mouse with your opponent. They are to answer truthfully and in detail the questions that have been chosen so the people can get a real picture of your policies.

That’s the moderators job and as far as i’m concerned. it’s the most important one during any debate.

]]> Comment on About by brandonwick http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/about/#comment-814 brandonwick Sat, 18 Aug 2012 22:56:32 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/?page_id=2#comment-814 Hi Tom, Thank you so much. Let's chat by email about getting you involved as a guest blogger. Hi Tom, Thank you so much. Let’s chat by email about getting you involved as a guest blogger.

]]> Comment on About by Tom MacKay http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/about/#comment-634 Tom MacKay Sun, 15 Jul 2012 20:27:01 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/?page_id=2#comment-634 The more I read on this site, the better I like it. I do have one question. How does one start an article? The more I read on this site, the better I like it.
I do have one question. How does one start an article?

]]> Comment on Rules of Engagement by Tom MacKay http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/rules-of-engagement/#comment-633 Tom MacKay Sun, 15 Jul 2012 20:21:49 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/#comment-633 I found this site by accident and glad I did. I read most of the articles and commented on one. Every article I read I was impressed, not necessary agreed, by how each contributer stated their opinon without using derogatory words, threats, and belittleing others with other opinons. How refreshing it is. I like to discuss politics but it can hardly be done. I have found out that most people are registered to a political party and to them whatever the party says is true and the other party is wrong. Those people don't ever the party nor do they research the problem or the actual bill. They have no clue as to the constutionaly the bill is. Just go to the polls and pull the party level. I will be visiting this site often. May not say much but sure will get a good education on both sides of the issues. I found this site by accident and glad I did. I read most of the articles and commented on one. Every article I read I was impressed, not necessary agreed, by how each contributer stated their opinon without using derogatory words, threats, and belittleing others with other opinons. How refreshing it is. I like to discuss politics but it can hardly be done. I have found out that most people are registered to a political party and to them whatever the party says is true and the other party is wrong. Those people don’t ever the party nor do they research the problem or the actual bill. They have no clue as to the constutionaly the bill is. Just go to the polls and pull the party level. I will be visiting this site often. May not say much but sure will get a good education on both sides of the issues.

]]> Comment on No more “war” (emphasis on the quotation marks) by Tom MacKay http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/2012/01/no-more-war-emphasis-on-the-quotation-marks/#comment-632 Tom MacKay Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:51:10 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/?p=505#comment-632 The article and first comment are very true and I too agree. Clitches are u sed to stir up population but mostly ignore the facts. Globe is another one. This planet is named world. Two others that gripes me is reinvent and broken. Many times I read where a law or authority is broken. To me what it means is that the law is not being enforced and the the person or office that has extended the authority granted. The article and first comment are very true and I too agree. Clitches are u sed to stir up population but mostly ignore the facts. Globe is another one. This planet is named world. Two others that gripes me is reinvent and broken. Many times I read where a law or authority is broken. To me what it means is that the law is not being enforced and the the person or office that has extended the authority granted.

]]> Comment on Playing chicken with our solvency, recovery, and standing in the world by Tami Guiher http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/2011/07/playing-chicken-with-our-solvency-recovery-and-standing-in-the-world/#comment-390 Tami Guiher Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:48:28 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/?p=226#comment-390 If you need to forecast, forecast often. One's mind has a way of making itself up in private, also it suddenly becomes clear what one methods to do. If you need to forecast, forecast often.
One’s mind has a way of making itself up in private, also it suddenly becomes clear what one methods to do.

]]> Comment on No more “war” (emphasis on the quotation marks) by Calmoderate http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/2012/01/no-more-war-emphasis-on-the-quotation-marks/#comment-386 Calmoderate Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:27:56 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/?p=505#comment-386 I concur in the sentiment expressed here. How likely is the tone of the rhetoric to ratchet down a bit? Unlikely, I think. Politics is more than just polarized ideological disputes. Its infotainment. It seems that if emotional buttons or some entertaining equivalent aren't pushed frequently enough, the audience goes to another source that offers more entertainment. The people involved in this emotion-riddled conflict are intelligent, sophisticated and tenacious. They demand a win regardless of the costs, e.g., sacrifice of rational discussion and reasonable acceptance of unspun reality to emotional appeals. If that accurately reflects the reality of the situation, how can one can inject more reason and less emotion/ideology into the discussion without losing the audience? I have no answer for that. I concur in the sentiment expressed here. How likely is the tone of the rhetoric to ratchet down a bit? Unlikely, I think. Politics is more than just polarized ideological disputes. Its infotainment. It seems that if emotional buttons or some entertaining equivalent aren’t pushed frequently enough, the audience goes to another source that offers more entertainment. The people involved in this emotion-riddled conflict are intelligent, sophisticated and tenacious. They demand a win regardless of the costs, e.g., sacrifice of rational discussion and reasonable acceptance of unspun reality to emotional appeals. If that accurately reflects the reality of the situation, how can one can inject more reason and less emotion/ideology into the discussion without losing the audience? I have no answer for that.

]]> Comment on Rules of Engagement by Jay Becker http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/rules-of-engagement/#comment-273 Jay Becker Thu, 29 Dec 2011 05:39:10 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/#comment-273 Read the whole of Roberts Rules, 10th edition, and you find the "rules" are quite complex. But at there are two basic values in the rules, everyone gets to be heard and the majority should not hurt the minority. In 50 years of watching and listening to public meetings Roberts Rules mostly is abused. Mostly the trouble comes from the chairman and members of the body not knowing the "rules" and using them. What people find is that to get anything done they have to think before opening their mouth. But Roberts even has a "rule" for that kind of foolish behavior: refer the topic to a committee for consideration in depth or move the group into a committee of the whole to listen to ranters at length, there may be some good ideas in them. Alas, I've not yet found a rule that insists emotionally charged speech must include tangible evidence to support the point being made. Read the whole of Roberts Rules, 10th edition, and you find the “rules” are quite complex. But at there are two basic values in the rules, everyone gets to be heard and the majority should not hurt the minority. In 50 years of watching and listening to public meetings Roberts Rules mostly is abused. Mostly the trouble comes from the chairman and members of the body not knowing the “rules” and using them. What people find is that to get anything done they have to think before opening their mouth. But Roberts even has a “rule” for that kind of foolish behavior: refer the topic to a committee for consideration in depth or move the group into a committee of the whole to listen to ranters at length, there may be some good ideas in them. Alas, I’ve not yet found a rule that insists emotionally charged speech must include tangible evidence to support the point being made.

]]> Comment on Rules of Engagement by brandonwick http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/rules-of-engagement/#comment-269 brandonwick Mon, 26 Dec 2011 22:42:19 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/#comment-269 Thanks for your comment Rudy. I've only recently become familiar with Robert's Rules of Order and think they are an effective, though somewhat old-fashioned, way of organizing group meetings and decision-making. For those wanting to leant more, see this Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert's_Rules_of_Order. What I'm trying to get to in my Rules of Engagement,\ is a framework for public figures and policy makers to take in today's more informal settings; debates, TV Q&As with opposing sides, commercials, interviews, speeches, OpEd pieces, blog posts, Tweets, etc. If we can focus the conversation more on what matters, we'll be more effective at reaching consensus and finding solutions. Thanks for your comment Rudy. I’ve only recently become familiar with Robert’s Rules of Order and think they are an effective, though somewhat old-fashioned, way of organizing group meetings and decision-making. For those wanting to leant more, see this Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert's_Rules_of_Order. What I’m trying to get to in my Rules of Engagement,\ is a framework for public figures and policy makers to take in today’s more informal settings; debates, TV Q&As with opposing sides, commercials, interviews, speeches, OpEd pieces, blog posts, Tweets, etc. If we can focus the conversation more on what matters, we’ll be more effective at reaching consensus and finding solutions.

]]> Comment on Rules of Engagement by Rudy (timothy)veridian http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/rules-of-engagement/#comment-265 Rudy (timothy)veridian Mon, 26 Dec 2011 02:31:12 +0000 http://www.constructivedebateblog.com/#comment-265 It was a pleasure to review these words of logic and what should be considered common sense. Outside ov my experiences reguarding "roberts rules ov order," its a whole new world out there for me... Thank you for your insight, Sincerely Timothy B. It was a pleasure to review these words of logic and what should be considered common sense. Outside ov my experiences reguarding “roberts rules ov order,” its a whole new world out there for me… Thank you for your insight, Sincerely Timothy B.

]]>