Posted by Rick [Rick] on March 28, 1999 at 23:03:45 {FMFBt36Xycoqs.a7KIAcMWXgIYA54YD7Q}:
In Reply to: *One more thing posted by J.H. on March 28, 1999 at 12:55:53:
Come on, Jan, for the benefit of readers who also must seem to you like JaneyJJJ's 6 year old first grade classmates, is it beneath you to defend your position? Or..... are we supposed to take your word she is posting "nonsense"?
I thought debates were exchanges of information, not "You're wrong because [...]" followed by the opponent's predictable, "No, I'm not wrong. I might as well be talking to a 6 year old so I won't dignify with a detailed response."
If no matter what information I present you discredit it simply based on comparing my words to a 6 year old's, and dismissing it is "nonsense", then what's the point of debating. You've won by stating I'm wrong, right?
Rick: "Jan, this is why I believe such and such [...]"
Jan: "Rick, you're wrong, plain and simple."
Conclusion: Jan won debate.
Correct conclusion? (I could have beat you to the punch and claimed you're wrong, then did I win instead?)
I'm curious because these debates lately seem to end with someone claiming the other is wrong, and letting the discerning reader compare educational backgrounds of each debater to pick a winner. Is the winner based on who has the most education? Then the debate ends before it begun; simply post the educational backgrounds of each debater, state the issue, and whoever has the most education is the one who possesses the absolute truth. (Being somewhat facetious.)
Rick