@StoicGoat
14 Years1,000+ Posts
DXP Survivor 2014 Part I (Page 10)
You are on page out of 13 | Reverse Order
Posted by duchessedenemours
Then I could post only the pie chart with results and wouldn't have to reveal names.
You're not trustworthy! 😛
It's really just a lot of work for no reason, good idea twinks but honestly why does this even have to get to a political standpoint. If I'm spectating this I sure as hell don't want to go to all the trouble. Think american idol or whatever all I have to do is text them, voila easy, none of this confirmation crap.
There is nothing to be lost or gained from wanting to fix DXP Survivor. Either way the show goes on for entertainment.
Posted by aquasnoz
It's really just a lot of work for no reason, good idea twinks but honestly why does this even have to get to a political standpoint. If I'm spectating this I sure as hell don't want to go to all the trouble. Think american idol or whatever all I have to do is text them, voila easy, none of this confirmation crap.There is nothing to be lost or gained from wanting to fix DXP Survivor. Either way the show goes on for entertainment.
It's a two question form, it's not really that much more than pming Stoic.
It's easy as pie.
click to expand
You need to filter out people using fake names, filter out people using the right names, filter out people using someone elses name by confirmation "voted" on thread. All for the sake someone started accusations. It's this sort of questioning that took it's toll on nights last year and it was disgusting for someone who's just trying to bring entertainment to DXP.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by GetMisted
Show me a doctrine that includes your 5 rights.No
This went on because you couldn't tell me what a right was. What makes it a right? Because you say so?
And when asked to show me a doctrine that shows why or how your your 5 are actually rights, you said "NO".
This happened because you discredited the UDHR.
It was a simple question. What makes a right, a right? And you couldn't give me an answer.
This is not what you said and its not verbatim.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by GetMisted
"You could've made an argument and taken material to back that free will is all but an illusion if it ever ended up being that bad therefore making freedom of will redundant. I recall you saying there is no free will but that was quickly skipped over after Nacho came back with a short retort."He said he didn't have to counter my arguement because his right to free will allows him to do so.
Give me a break. You guys can keep that crap. Judge needs to stop being biased.
Show me the exact quote where I say that verbatim.
click to expand
Countering an argument is much different than supplying a doctrine that is not required for me to do. Stoic said you don't have to use the law if you don't want to to defend your rights therefore I didn't.
Bah I said it was a good idea twinks don't take it the wrong way. I just think people will find a way to complain regardless. Question is how much effort does the host want to put into it.
Also ^^^^ you were not asking me to counter your right to life you were asking me to back my rights up with a doctrine. What makes you think I have to do that?
I'm sticking with what I initially said: PM your votes to me. It's not perfect, but it will have to be perfect enough. If you don't trust that your vote will be counted correctly, maybe you shouldn't bother to vote?
Posted by aquasnoz
Bah I said it was a good idea twinks don't take it the wrong way. I just think people will find a way to complain regardless. Question is how much effort does the host want to put into it.
I bet Duncan would be accused of cheating if he built a vote function in to DXP. 😛
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Also ^^^^ you were not asking me to counter your right to life you were asking me to back my rights up with a doctrine. What makes you think I have to do that?I made two points.
1. Before you determine the importance of a "Right", you must first define what a "Right" is.
2. Once you determine what a "Right" is, you need a doctrine to define who and who doesn't have that right.
The Goat said we "could" use law as a basis to our arguement, although it's not needed.
Since I decided to use law as a basis of my arguement, it forces you to counter it. If you don't, you fail to argue against my claim which is what you did. Which is what all of you did.
He did not say debate "without" law.
I did define what a right is.
Page 12 ~_~
Honestly this has to be the 3rd time LORD ^.^
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by StoicGoat
I have received a PM requesting clarification. There is no need to raise any issue pertaining to law in the course of this debate. The teams are welcome to do so if they feel it will aid their respective causes, but I assure you, the citing of legal precedents and the like is completely unnecessary.They are not laws. They are Rights. We use laws to uphold our rights.
Laws Uphold privileges..
Rights however cannot be taken from you or me and neither can they be given... they simply are.
click to expand
Its defined how its defined in your blessed doctrine and even how it was implied by the goat IN THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR WHICH YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE.
For the purposes of this debate, —human rights?? shall be defined as —those fundamental rights humans have by virtue of being human.??
The Goat
I mean jesus he defined it from the beginning why the hell are you gonna debate with me about what the definition of a word is under instructions you agreed to?
Are you just trying to incite hysteria?
Posted by GetMisted
Although thats the poorest defintion of a right Ive ever head (and still basically saying it's a right because you say it is)..I'll give you point #1.
What about point #2? Who gets to have the right and why?
And don't say because you said so or because we're human. Where's the documentation saying humans get that right? Why can't my cat have the same rights?
Dude stoic said IN THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE FOURTH FUCKING TIME........
For the purposes of this debate, —human rights?? shall be defined as —those fundamental rights humans have by virtue of being human.??
Like seriously....
^.^——!
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Its defined how its defined in your blessed doctrine and even how it was implied by the goat IN THE INSTRUCTIONS FOR WHICH YOU CONTINUE TO IGNORE.For the purposes of this debate, —human rights?? shall be defined as —those fundamental rights humans have by virtue of being human.??
The Goat
But what says that? The Bible? You didn't counter the UDHR with the bible.
click to expand
Look don't complain to me I just followed the rules of the debate. The UDHR didn't make the rules to the debate.... Stoic did.
What part do you not understand about that?
bol...I hope I didn't miss anything new..Do we know who is is being voted of yet? and who is joining the loosing team?
Posted by aquariuslove14
bol...I hope I didn't miss anything new..Do we know who is is being voted of yet? and who is joining the loosing team?
Posted by StoicGoat
The votes are in and LilyTree is out.Audience: submit your votes for which of the Airheads
Aquariuslove14
Aquasnoz
Duchessedenemours
NotYourAverageAquarius
SteveW
Stillwateryou want to move to the Dryer Sheets' team. Votes must be submitted by PM to me to be counted. As stated in the opening of this thread, votes submitted by usernames whose first post was on or after March 6, 2014 will not be considered.
Votes will be accepted until 4PM EST tomorrow, March 21st. Assuming there is a clear majority, the next debate will commence at 9PM EST the same evening.
click to expand
Posted by aquariuslove14
bol...I hope I didn't miss anything new..Do we know who is is being voted of yet? and who is joining the loosing team?Posted by StoicGoat
The votes are in and LilyTree is out.Audience: submit your votes for which of the Airheads
Aquariuslove14
Aquasnoz
Duchessedenemours
NotYourAverageAquarius
SteveW
Stillwateryou want to move to the Dryer Sheets' team. Votes must be submitted by PM to me to be counted. As stated in the opening of this thread, votes submitted by usernames whose first post was on or after March 6, 2014 will not be considered.
Votes will be accepted until 4PM EST tomorrow, March 21st. Assuming there is a clear majority, the next debate will commence at 9PM EST the same evening.
Marquis de Goat I have a question...
Can members of the opposing team vote for who we want on our team from the Airheads or are these votes only for the audience?
click to expand
Audience only.
Posted by StoicGoatAudience only.
Very simple (and you know this) Start a Audience of Survivor vote only thread.
Count the votes
Now of course it's known some people have each other's passwords to screen names & multiples, but hey, it's the screen name's vote that counts.
*an Audience
I mean we all took turns defining a word for you.
Thats literally what you requested for 50% of the debate.
EVEN AFTER IT HAD ALREADY BEEN DEFINED TO YOU.
How is that a good debate strategy?
Why does someone ask for the definition of words in the english language?
Why do you dislike me so much jeez ^.^?
What the hell did I even do to you!?
Posted by StoicGoatAudience only.
Very simple (and you know this) Start a Audience of Survivor vote only thread.
Count the votes
Now of course it's known some people have each other's passwords to screen names & multiples, but hey, it's the screen name's vote that counts.
click to expand
If people have time to make a fake user just to place a fake vote that is pathetic..
Judge goat please dont accept votes from anyone who has no thread history on their page before the survivor game start and anyone u have known or heard of that creat multiple user name
Ridiculous
Posted by SteveW
That is on page 9 and 10. The quoting is bad.I thought your team did a good job and you did well with holding the fort down for your team when there was little to no help for you.
I thought GetMisted did well too.
It was mainly GetMisted and Damnata holding it down for their team.
Posted by StoicGoatAudience only.
Very simple (and you know this) Start a Audience of Survivor vote only thread.
Count the votes
Now of course it's known some people have each other's passwords to screen names & multiples, but hey, it's the screen name's vote that counts.
If people have time to make a fake user just to place a fake vote that is pathetic..
Judge goat please dont accept votes from anyone who has no thread history on their page before the survivor game start and anyone u have known or heard of that creat multiple user name
Ridiculous
click to expand
He already stated anyone with no posts made prior to march 6 will not count 🙂
Posted by StoicGoatAudience only.
Very simple (and you know this) Start a Audience of Survivor vote only thread.
Count the votes
Now of course it's known some people have each other's passwords to screen names & multiples, but hey, it's the screen name's vote that counts.
If people have time to make a fake user just to place a fake vote that is pathetic..
Judge goat please dont accept votes from anyone who has no thread history on their page before the survivor game start and anyone u have known or heard of that creat multiple user name
Ridiculous
He already stated anyone with no posts made prior to march 6 will not count 🙂
click to expand
Oh okay..lol....
Posted by TwirlingStrawberry
@aquariuslove14that would be impossible and completely unfair.
everyone who has ever disagreed with LIB has been accused of being me at least once.....just look at her profile. FFS, she STILL thinks getmisted is ME.
I have on account and one account only but I'm always accused of being a million different people on here because some people are just delusional and like making up stories for drama.
you can't just take someone's 'word' on multiples because sometimes there are personal grudges and vendettas attached to those accusations.
Yea that could be true also...holding personal grudges.....what ever happen..it is what it is...
Posted by duchessedenemours
It isn't just LIB that is questioning this process. LOLwell, that means that the judge isn't trusted.....which is silly.
this is a survivor game on a message board.
there is no prize.
there is no money.
it's all in fun and entertainment.
people who are going to get butthurt over it can scroll past it.
why make stoic put more work into it? ffs, he's already judging and that is really time consuming.
Exactly!!!!!!! +100000000000
If you don't trust the Judge, don't play. It's just a game: not real life and not life and death.
click to expand
Right, X 100000000000
Doesnt get anymore real than this..... 🙂
Back to bed i go
Posted by scorchedearth
lol at damnata being called a guy. 😛
I thought getmisted and D both said was a guy earlier in the thread...i must have missed something then..lol
Who is a man?
And
Who is a womam?
Just put it in plain englishs please..lol
Hurts my head....
Posted by TwirlingStrawberry
@aquariuslove14that would be impossible and completely unfair.
everyone who has ever disagreed with LIB has been accused of being me at least once.....just look at her profile. FFS, she STILL thinks getmisted is ME.
I have on account and one account only but I'm always accused of being a million different people on here because some people are just delusional and like making up stories for drama.
you can't just take someone's 'word' on multiples because sometimes there are personal grudges and vendettas attached to those accusations.
ok..I see you still want to fuck with me. no problem.
Posted by StoicGoatAudience only.
Very simple (and you know this) Start a Audience of Survivor vote only thread.
Count the votes
Now of course it's known some people have each other's passwords to screen names & multiples, but hey, it's the screen name's vote that counts.
click to expand
^^^guess that was just too logical or fair eh?
Posted by TwirlingStrawberry
I don't think there is anything wrong with what he's doing now. Anonymously and in PM. The judge made the rules ahead of time and they should be respected. *shrugs*Nobody gave nights this hard of a time our first go around.
.
Why are you lying again? Would you like me to post the thread where shellshocker SHOWED PMS of Nights as the judge cheating? lol...and then, of course, just like you when he was called out he DELETED..and changed to afternoondelights.
Open a thread stoic and let the audience vote.
Posted by TwirlingStrawberry
when do we find out who is getting moved and when does the next debate start?
We find out today at 4pm eastern time who is voted off and who will join the next team
Then
The next debate is at 9pm eastern time today??_.
Can't wait!!!!
Open a thread stoic and let the audience vote.
Posted by GetMisted
I don't care how you do it. Just don't vote NYAA to my team. I plan to quit if you do.
Haha dude I hope they do.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I mean we all took turns defining a word for you.Thats literally what you requested for 50% of the debate.
EVEN AFTER IT HAD ALREADY BEEN DEFINED TO YOU.How is that a good debate strategy?
Why does someone ask for the definition of words in the english language?Why do you dislike me so much jeez ^.^?
What the hell did I even do to you!?
A definition in regards to a doctrine that says they are rights. It's really not that hard to understand.
Goat said law "could" be used. If someone uses it, you must be able to debate against it.
You tried to discredit the UDHR, but offered no doctrine in it's place.
click to expand
LoL you can't possibly have 155 IQ unless your just trying to be a pain in the ass an cause drama. No other reason for you to be acting this way period. No intelligent person would be outside some sort of ulterior motive unbeknownst to us all.
Oh excuse me you're* -_-
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I mean we all took turns defining a word for you.Thats literally what you requested for 50% of the debate.
EVEN AFTER IT HAD ALREADY BEEN DEFINED TO YOU.How is that a good debate strategy?
Why does someone ask for the definition of words in the english language?Why do you dislike me so much jeez ^.^?
What the hell did I even do to you!?
A definition in regards to a doctrine that says they are rights. It's really not that hard to understand.
Goat said law "could" be used. If someone uses it, you must be able to debate against it.
You tried to discredit the UDHR, but offered no doctrine in it's place.
click to expand
Yes You could use the Law to try and defend YOUR OWN POSITION AND CLAIMED RIGHTS... I'd like to know why you think just because you chose to that means I have to? Its like you have some key misunderstanding about this debate or debating in general. Your defend your position with points and I defend mine with points of my own. There has never been in the history of debating outside of some form of set rules that states I must back up my position with the same things you choose to back yours up. If anything that would cause confusion as to what your actually debating against seeing as how the same source backs you both up.
I lost debates last year too.... plenty of them. Get over it already. And you keep acting like it was only me you were debating. You were debating a TEAM. You even said you felt someone else did a better job... And could concede the win to them. Well if thats true... why are you bitching??! He was on my team ^.^? For all you know thats why stoic gave us the win.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
I mean we all took turns defining a word for you.Thats literally what you requested for 50% of the debate.
EVEN AFTER IT HAD ALREADY BEEN DEFINED TO YOU.How is that a good debate strategy?
Why does someone ask for the definition of words in the english language?Why do you dislike me so much jeez ^.^?
What the hell did I even do to you!?
A definition in regards to a doctrine that says they are rights. It's really not that hard to understand.
Goat said law "could" be used. If someone uses it, you must be able to debate against it.
You tried to discredit the UDHR, but offered no doctrine in it's place.
LoL you can't possibly have 155 IQ unless your just trying to be a pain in the ass an cause drama. No other reason for you to be acting this way period. No intelligent person would be outside some sort of ulterior motive unbeknownst to us all.
No need to attack my intelligence. It was a debate, and you didn't debate against the arguements I presented. And since it was a team debate, I seek clarification as to why your team won.
click to expand
Don't give me the don't attack crap pssh.
How bout you lose humbly with some manners. Act like an adult maybe?
I never said you don't have the intelligence you claim to have. I said you have to have some ulterior motive to be acting this way.
And if its a team effort whats there to question about seriously— Your argument is not even based on an individual based debate but a team effort that your judging a teams performance off of me? You tell me how thats not biased you massive migraine?
Posted by GetMisted
"Yes You could use the Law to try and defend YOUR OWN POSITION AND CLAIMED RIGHTS... I'd like to know why you think just because you chose to that means I have to? Its like you have some key misunderstanding about this debate or debating in general. Your defend your position with points and I defend mine with points of my own. There has never been in the history of debating outside of some form of set rules that states I must back up my position with the same things you choose to back yours up. If anything that would cause confusion as to what your actually debating against seeing as how the same source backs you both up.I lost debates last year too.... plenty of them. Get over it already. And you keep acting like it was only me you were debating. You were debating a TEAM. You even said you felt someone else did a better job... And could concede the win to them. Well if thats true... why are you cookiemonstering??! He was on my team ^.^? For all you know thats why stoic gave us the win."
So to you, a debate is just presenting your points? There's no need to prove the other side wrong? #airhead
Me pointing out the limitations of the law and the error of their choice of words must have been lost you then.
Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Posted by GetMisted
"Yes You could use the Law to try and defend YOUR OWN POSITION AND CLAIMED RIGHTS... I'd like to know why you think just because you chose to that means I have to? Its like you have some key misunderstanding about this debate or debating in general. Your defend your position with points and I defend mine with points of my own. There has never been in the history of debating outside of some form of set rules that states I must back up my position with the same things you choose to back yours up. If anything that would cause confusion as to what your actually debating against seeing as how the same source backs you both up.I lost debates last year too.... plenty of them. Get over it already. And you keep acting like it was only me you were debating. You were debating a TEAM. You even said you felt someone else did a better job... And could concede the win to them. Well if thats true... why are you cookiemonstering??! He was on my team ^.^? For all you know thats why stoic gave us the win."
So to you, a debate is just presenting your points? There's no need to prove the other side wrong? #airhead
Me pointing out the limitations of the law and the error of their choice of words must have been lost you then.
Me stating the a doctrine is needed to specify rights must have been lost on you.
click to expand
You said I didn't try to prove you wrong but I did... Furthermore, if you have no argument with steve on our team winning the debate for us then why are you complaining at all.
Wouldn't that be a waste of time?
And thats not to imply I IN FACT PROVED YOU WRONG i'm just saying that you make it sound like there was no attempt. And why does it matter? Apparently to you... we won without me being present so I ask whats your deal?
Posted by SteveW
And where did I disagree with UDHR?I agreed with UDHR and slammed the UN.
You are correct again, Sir. And like I said, I would have given you the win.
However, Goat made this a team debate, and one of your team members argued against the UDHR, and the team failed to back up all 5 rights in one doctrine.
If Goat wants to specify that Steve won the debate foe his team, I will be satisfied.
But to simply say that a team won, when the entire team did not debate all points, so bias. You can pick the team that has your friend on it without offering any reasoning behind why they won.
click to expand
Why is you giving wins ^.^
You say he won therefore team won so whats there to complain about from the onset.
Posted by GetMisted
"You said I didn't try to prove you wrong but I did... Furthermore, if you have no argument with steve on our team winning the debate for us then why are you complaining at all.Wouldn't that be a waste of time?"
1. You didn't prove me wrong because you failed to present a doctrine to support my rights, after trying to discredit the UDHR.
2. I would give Steve the win if it wasn't a TEAM debate. Since it was a team debate, and your two arguments didn't agree, it put the debate in out favor.
So, Suggestion to the Goat..
Instead of saying it's a team debate (which would mean all arguements for the team must agree), all team members argue a point and a single member can win the debate for the team.
I could deal with that.
That we, he could say:
"Steve argued his points and defended against all counter claims and has won the debate. In doing so, he has won his team immunity from the eviction vote."
Agreed?
Why am I supposed to help you by providing you with support for your rights. You chose those rights to defend all your own. Your job is to provide the doctrine for your rights if you think one should be presented OR if you think one helps strengthen it. My job is to try to disclaim the validity of using the document or poke wholes at its credibility. If I presented a doctrine to support my position it would have been your burden to do the same. But our team chose not to. And rather used other sources and empirical evidence to support are position.
I did read it.
Posted by GetMisted
You didn't defend against the UDHR.
You suggest it to him I'm not the one with the problem.
And the bolded above is an outright lie. It's the first thing I did the second you mentioned it from the very beginning of the debate.
Yes
Scept I left out the word practically in the first post.
Inalienable is used throughout the entire doctrine. Yet alot of things in it are not inalienable.
I defined liberty... You serious that I have to present you with some sort of source for every single thought of mine even if the thought is solely mine....
This debate was a very philosophical type of debate. He said we could use empirical evidence and thats what I chose to use. If you think we shouldn't be able to use that you should have not agreed to play or found fault with the rules from the onset.
Elle if its boring to you. Why post? Why so interested.
Did this help you understand your situation?
dxpnet has hosted real conversations like this since 2000. If you value independent communities, you can support the site below.
Every contribution helps keep dxpnet independent and ad-light.
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →
And if they do not also post that they voted? Are those votes ignored? I am...unmoved.