h a l f b a k e r y
The embarrassing drunkard uncle of invention.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
or Create a new account.
|
|
|
I had no idea what category to put this one in.
Arguments. Everyday, everywhere. How often are you arguing your point against more than one opponent, knowing 100% for certain you are correct, but for whatever reason they side with eachother and do their best to humiliate you?
Yeah. Well, how's this.
Arguments can be displayed publicly - the net is obviously a first choice.
The opposing sides give their account of the argument, perhaps by text or email or whatever, and the public are left to decide who is in the right.
Arguments can be scrolled through in much the same way as you scroll through categories here on halfbakery, and the public can vote for whom they think is correct. At the end of the alloted time, the argument is settled publicly.
The obvious downside is if the argument itself is a complicated one, and of course, can people be bothered to spend their time filling out an 'account' of their argument?
Yes, the idea has a couple of holes .. but if your 'opposer' is a particularly argumentative or arrogant sort and you want to stick it to them, do it publicly.
Just make sure you're right!
Note: I've read the Public Resolution idea, and this doesn't involve the legal system, it's more an idea to passively air your view publicly .. and of course, it doesn't warrant people beating the hell out of eachother!
Note II: Spelling corrected, courtesy of Jinbish. Thx ;)
[link]
|
| |
Public opinion might solve spelling... |
|
| |
Can you give an example of an argument that this forum would be used for? And what method do you propose for publicising these 'arguments'? |
|
| |
I would have thought a hotornot style rating of opinions would work quite well. |
|
| |
Probably wouldnt take too long to set up either |
|
| |
The public is a bunch of idiots. |
|
| |
Grab your tourches and pitchforks! |
|
| |
//Public Opinion Solves Arguments//
Its been my experience that 'opinion's rarely solve anything. |
|
| |
For more specific arguments, you could gather say 12 members of the public, and have them listen to all the facts and arguments of a particular argument, and then decide, one way or another... |
|
| |
Its better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6. |
|
| |
//knowing 100% for certain you are correct, but for whatever reason they side with each other and do their best to humiliate you// |
|
| |
<Dear Diedre Says:> Then stuff 'em, k - you've tried, it's their loss. Unless of course they are right after all, for the way you write it looks like this happens to you a lot. In which case, listen to what they say and be grateful that they still speak to you. My premium rate phone line will explain it all. </DDS> |
|
| |
Even with something as non-contentious as the application of Newton's Laws of Motion people still manage to disagree, no matter how well each side presents its case or believes in it. |
|
| |
Now take something really woolly like 'Criminal behaviour - nature or nurture?' and no matter what the public decide, the different sides (as there will be at least two) will still think they were right, and so on. |
|
| |
A key difficulty with the idea as proposed is obtaining a representative sample of the public who will vote on each issue. Without regulation those with a vested interest may tend to block vote and drown out others; with regulation you have the difficulty of agreeing upon the regulation criteria in the first place. Either way someone will dispute the process and/or outcome if it doesn't fit with their views. |
|
| |
[boysparks] Nah it doesn't happen to me very often at all actually. It was an impulse-bake to be honest. Some people never see anything from anyone elses POV, and when they know they're losing an argument they attempt to make others look foolish. I saw it the other day and it just irritated me .. |
|
| |
//Note II: Spelling corrected, courtesy of Jinbish// Only a few remaining. |
|
| |
I'm not sure what is wrong with people beating the hell out of each other, but I am sure that the "public" would rather watch that than think about which one of your loser friends is right about President Bush's underware choices. |
|
| |