Author
|
Topic: Peanut gallery for Great Debate?
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22929 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 7.2
|
Re: Adminnemooseus still says "No" to having a "Peanut Gallery" right now
Adminnemooseus writes: While a "real world" debate might have an audience, that audiences responses to statements would be limited to such as cheers and groans. They would not be shouting debate content up to the podiums. True, but you're addressing the analogy, not the point I was making. The Internet is a much richer environment (in some ways) than the live debate before an audience, and there any many more channels of feedback available. I think what you're saying is that you believe some of that feedback affects the debate in material ways. I agree. Viva la differance! --Percy
|
Minnemooseus
Member Posts: 3971 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: 11-11-2001 Member Rating: 7.4
|
|
Message 17 of 24 (197575)
04-07-2005 9:39 PM
|
Reply to: Message 16 by Percy 04-07-2005 8:23 PM
|
|
Off topic grammar digression
...some of that feedback affects the debate.. I have long struggled on where to use "effect" and where to use "affect". I think I long just used "effect" for all, and forgot about "affect". Recently it was pointed out to me that "effect" is a verb, and "affect" is a noun. So, I think feedback effects the debate. The change in the debate would be the affect. (I'm a bad) Moose
This message is a reply to: | | Message 16 by Percy, posted 04-07-2005 8:23 PM | | Percy has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 18 by Percy, posted 04-07-2005 10:16 PM | | Minnemooseus has not replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22929 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 7.2
|
Re: Off topic grammar digression
minnemooseus writes: So, I think feedback effects the debate. The change in the debate would be the affect. Let's ask Al Frankin!
Recently it was pointed out to me that "effect" is a verb, and "affect" is a noun. Both are both. An actor might try to effect an impression of heightened affect, and that might affect the audience with great effect. --Percy
This message is a reply to: | | Message 17 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-07-2005 9:39 PM | | Minnemooseus has not replied |
|
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1238 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: 03-23-2003
|
|
Message 19 of 24 (198839)
04-13-2005 12:56 AM
|
|
|
GD topic much too broad...
I see that the GD is pretty much over with at this point. In my opinion, while the discussion was interesting, the topic was too general. Debating the entire Grand Canyon as a whole is impossible. Heck, you couldn't do a Ph.D. on the Grand Canyon! Maybe in the future, geologic topics should be much much narrower in scope - if possible. Perhaps discussing a single Formation or Group within the Grand Canyon. Or why a certain rock shows evidence for deposition/formation under specific conditions. YECism gets a hand in geology only when Creationists are able to generalize. When you get down to specifics, YECism loses. This message has been edited by roxrkool, 04-12-2005 11:57 PM
Replies to this message: | | Message 20 by Percy, posted 04-13-2005 7:48 AM | | roxrkool has replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22929 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 7.2
|
|
Message 20 of 24 (198890)
04-13-2005 7:48 AM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by roxrkool 04-13-2005 12:56 AM
|
|
Re: GD topic much too broad...
One suggestion I think you made recently to Faith was to take her time. Unless Faith says she's done, it might be too early to conclude she's done. --Percy
This message is a reply to: | | Message 19 by roxrkool, posted 04-13-2005 12:56 AM | | roxrkool has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 21 by roxrkool, posted 04-13-2005 11:55 AM | | Percy has replied |
|
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1238 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: 03-23-2003
|
|
Message 21 of 24 (198951)
04-13-2005 11:55 AM
|
Reply to: Message 20 by Percy 04-13-2005 7:48 AM
|
|
Re: GD topic much too broad...
Didn't Faith pretty much say she was done when she said "goodbye?" But I understand, Faith has stated many times she was leaving and is still here. I'm not starting a discussion on the GD yet. Anyway, the problem is the scope of the topic. It's much too broad which results in long posts that are frustratingly time-consuming for Faith and jazz to write, read, reply to. Narrowing it way down will help them both. What about only duscussing the Temple Butte Limestone and associated contacts? This message has been edited by roxrkool, 04-13-2005 10:57 AM
This message is a reply to: | | Message 20 by Percy, posted 04-13-2005 7:48 AM | | Percy has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 22 by Percy, posted 04-13-2005 11:59 AM | | roxrkool has replied |
|
Percy
Member Posts: 22929 From: New Hampshire Joined: 12-23-2000 Member Rating: 7.2
|
|
Message 22 of 24 (198953)
04-13-2005 11:59 AM
|
Reply to: Message 21 by roxrkool 04-13-2005 11:55 AM
|
|
Re: GD topic much too broad...
From Faith's Message 106:
Faith writes: But maybe I just need to calm down and come back later. I did have a direction I was trying to go in, but I don't know if I can get back to it. Doesn't sound like finality to me. --Percy
This message is a reply to: | | Message 21 by roxrkool, posted 04-13-2005 11:55 AM | | roxrkool has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 23 by roxrkool, posted 04-13-2005 2:53 PM | | Percy has not replied |
|
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1238 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: 03-23-2003
|
|
Message 23 of 24 (198984)
04-13-2005 2:53 PM
|
Reply to: Message 22 by Percy 04-13-2005 11:59 AM
|
|
Re: GD topic much too broad...
okay. Apparently I did not read enough of the thread. My apologies.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 22 by Percy, posted 04-13-2005 11:59 AM | | Percy has not replied |
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13107 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002
|
|
Message 24 of 24 (201874)
04-24-2005 5:16 PM
|
|
|
Thread copied to the Peanut gallery for Great Debate? thread in the Coffee House forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
|