PF Debates: Will You Participate?

Speaking about Taiwan

Sorry, Catch, but you are wrong regarding Taiwan. Taiwan has not always been part of China. In fact, Taiwan, or the island of Formosa as it was also known belonged to China for only eight years and that was under the Manchus, who are not considered Chinese by the Han but invaders.

Taiwan was ceded to Japan in perpetuity and was part of the Japanese Empire when Japan lost WWII. It was occupied for the allies by Chiang Kai-Sheck who moved his army there after losing the Chinese Civil War. Chiang and the Kuomintang occupied the island under martial law for forty years. After martial law ended the mainland Chinese used Chang's occupation of the island to declare that it was an integral part of China because Chang had always claimed to be the legitimate ruler of mainland China.

Eighty Five percent of the people living in Taiwan are ethnic Taiwanese. Their language is different as is their culture. Saying Taiwan is part of China because China is big and Taiwan is small is like saying Sri Lanka is part of India because India is big and the island of Ceylon is small.

Taiwan should belong to the Taiwanese, and barring that, it should revert to Japan.

 

The Qing were Chinese, not Han. They ruled for quite a while. Most of China's eastern coast was occupied by Japan, but that doesn't make it a new territory.

The overall argument need be simple; under conventional determination of an independent state; one need have independent international relations... which Taiwan does not have.

 

Wrong again, Catch. The United Nations has declared that the future of Taiwan should be decided by the Taiwanese, not by the mainland Chinese.

 

The coastof China was occupied but the island of Taiwan was ceded. There is quite a difference. China seems to have this idea that any land they want should be part of China.

 

How further off topic can one be?

 

Granny pro'bly will...

... she likes to argue...

... `specially when she tryin' to set some lefty lib'ral straight...

... dat got a wet noodle fer brains...

... Uncle Ferd pro'bly won't...

... he don't waste his time with `em...

... he just smacks `em upside o' the head.

 

Both Granny and Uncle Ferd are conservative? I could have sworn Uncle Ferd was a good commie like myself!! What a major disappointment!!

 

I am not against it, I and others just do not want anybody locked out that's all. Since when is anybody locked out of a thread? Can others now request their own thread?

 

The whole idea is for it to be a one on one contest. It's more to showcase the debate skills of those who choose to participate than anything else. And I believe it's already been stated several times that the lockout is temporary. After whatever timeline is eventually settled on is finished, everyone will be free to post in the thread.

It's really not anything to get worked up about.

 

exactly...this is why I like the idea of a section where someone could actually discuss the stated topic instead of wading thru a bunch of irrelevent posts.

If I wanted to read the history of Taiwan, I would go to the international section and read it there...preferably under a thread title that said something along the lines of "This thread is about Taiwan"


lort knows I have been guilty of this, and in most threads I wouldn't care too much but if you are trying to have a serious conversation with someone and some clown pops in every five seconds to blow bubbles and honk horns, it gets old QUICK.

 

Look ray, at the start they also had this thing judged, through this thread they realized how many were against that and are now leaning away from it at least from the start,,good move right? So, there is nothing wrong with discussing the things that bother people about it,,I do not want to ruin anybodies good time. Obviously the best solution would be just to put it in group and they could invite who they want, but supposedly this is an impossible task. Fine, then leave it in the debate section and leave the section as is, they just had a practice debate in there and everything was fine, nobody cares to interrupt them, especially if they are told they will be booted.

When you start giving some people special rights and not others [especially on a open debating forum] you are giving preference to some, you are making it exclusive, why should it be it's the same thing we do all day here. Why cant somebody else then ask for a closed off section? everybody puts up with some trolling, are they better than others? The History of this place is openness for all, many want it left that way, it will not change their debate one iota, we just proved that. What they are saying is..NO NOT FOR US WE ARE SPECIAL!
Sorry that's wrong in my opinion, their desires are no better than anothers, they hold no more weight. How much time do we spend speaking of equality, now the very ones that seek it are EXCLUDING? Shall we sit in the back of the Bus while the people up front debate?

 

No one is getting any special rights. If you want to participate you throw your name in and voila, you'll get to participate.

It's a contest. Pure and simple. When you go to a football game, they don't let people in the stands suit up to play. You want to be a player, put your name in. You want to spectate, sit in the stands. You want to heckle the refs and the players, you're off to a good start, and for no worthwhile reason.

 

..................For the 3rd time now, are you serious?

 

There is no judging, I fail to see a contest. In a contest there is a winner and Loser, there is none here. The object as stated is to eliminate trolling, the same thing we all put up with.
The gay threads get killed, how about giving them a break as well.

Further more A contest [if that's what you want to call it, or it becomes] can still be held with people on the thread, it makes no difference. That debate area has been there for some time, same thing

 

We gave participants the option to exclude judges if they wanted to, which doesn't translate to "there will be no judging".

 

EPV, I may be pre-empting, but I'm curious how the debate topics will be arrived at. Are you taking suggestions for debate topics from posters? If yes, would you consider a thread where posters could give their suggestions for debate topics? I'd say we're possibly not up to that stage yet, but am a bit curious how that part of it will work.

 

That's The Problem, An Alternate Thread,,,are You Serious???
How about a alternate Bus......

 

Throwing around the options of sending pm's to me, (which I'm admittedly not crazy about) a sticky for topic requests, or mods choosing the topics. Might end up being the 2nd option.

 

Go check out the current DEBATE section to see how well this will work, flounder. Just because somebody likes to hear themself talk (uninterrupted) doesn't mean it makes for good reading.

Much ado about nothing. They'll need to have judges to insure somebody will actually read the opinions/drivel posted there.

 

Why would you ask unless you consider it a viable option? Yes, for the 25th time... people can start their own threads and discuss the debate topics if they feel it necessary. It's like there's two of you right now.

 

If we already have a mechanism where people can request their own threads to debate a topic why on Earth do we need to start another section where people will have their own threads to discuss a topic?

 

Okay, thanks, EPV. Looking forward to seeing the debate topics.

 

No,,,there is one of you that is not understanding, and I do wish you would stop getting personal. Can I have my own thread for my own use,,Gay thread, Religious thread,,,we do not want others as well

 

The terms of service for Political Forum allow any posts by any poster in any thread except for those that attack another poster or that try to get around the obscenity filter. What are mods going to do to posters who have the temerity to post a comment in one of the 'debate threads'? Are these posters going to be temp banned, perm banned, have their snacks taken away from them?

It seems certain moderators are attempting to change the terms of service arbitrarily by forbidding all but selected posters from posting in specific threads. What's next, forbidding liberals from posting in conservative threads and vice versa, forbidding atheists from posting in religion threads (oh wait, we were already told that won't happen), forbidding Americans from posting in a certain poster's anti-American screed threads?

Under the present terms of service, the moderators do not have the authority to forbid anyone posting in any thread in which they wish to post. Are they going to simply change the terms of service on their own?

 

No, as we've stuck to the premise that says the exclusive and sanctioned expression of one preferrable view (while excluding all others) aren't permitted in the open forum. Debates (with mixed views being shared) aren't at all related to the sections you want... which express only the position you agree with. Attempting to prove the two as somehow similar will fail.