This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
DOTD - Debate of The Day #52
Return to board index
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
@MyTie- I didn't see a single thing about being a victim in her whole post.No no. The "self-victimization" is the whole LGBT movement as a whole, which is what we are talking about here, not a wowhead user. The "backlash" from an oreo ad, in the form of facebook posts, is garnering unheard of attention. Most facebook idiots are overlooked. Maybe I wasn't clear as to who that comment was directed at. I guess that misunderstanding is where the rest of this comes from:How do you walk around all day completely unable to be civil to people over the most minor of annoyances, and still function in society? How does that relate to your advice in the QOTD "Love?" I don't understand how you can be so against people who don't follow the tenets of loving their brother in their religion on an intellectual level during debates, but be so ready to just snap, be nasty, sarcastic and downright rude whenever you have the slightest inclination to, and with no provocation. And not just about moral issues either. I have watched you describe your co-workers in the most condescending, degrading language possible for being unintelligent, into sports, and uninformed. I watched you pick nasty fights with people over video games, trash Noxy's art and tell Mila she'd look like a hooker in a shrug she liked.I'm critical of video games. I think Noxy's art is skilled, but too sexualized, which isn't "trashing" it. That thing Mila liked wasn't a shrug, but either way, it was directed at an article of clothing, not her personally. You LOOK for an opportunity to be mean to people, regardless of whether you are morally offended or personally involved in the issue or not.I really don't. You don't know my motives. I think you largely misunderstand me, as you have in this topic.Fatalheaven has taken some real flak for the short amount of time she's been here, because of the Q&A thread and the debate one, and I haven't seen her be rude, or snap back at anyone. How do you justify to yourself how you treat people day-in and day-out? Like seriously- I want you to tell me what thought process goes into you believing that how you talk to and about people is completely fine.
When have I given Fatalheaven flak? I remember welcoming her to wowhead. I don't even think I went into this Q&A thread.
Listen, I really think you have mistaken my tone. My intention is not to be rude, or condasending, or to create problems. I'm sorry if you think it is. I mean that. I apologize. Can we try to look past all this and move on?
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I wasn't aware that it was a law, but I didn't think that they'd be making statements that would significantly damage the company.I guess for privately owned businesses, the decision is made by the people affected so there's no reason for them not to do what they want. If corporations are doing it, then I imagine they've done enough market research to decide it's not going to harm their shareholders, and I can agree that if you are making decisions with someone else's money, you do have an obligation to protect them as well. However, I agree that they would probably not be doing this if it was financially unsound, and since we're assuming that it's not, then there would be no further reason for them not to have advertising campaigns about social issues.
@MyTie- OK, I apologize if I misunderstand your intent with these statements. I definitely don't want to drag the thread further into a back and forth that has nothing to do with the debate.
Post by
MyTie
@MyTie- OK, I apologize if I misunderstand your intent with these statements. I definitely don't want to drag the thread further into a back and forth that has nothing to do with the debate.
Great. When we don't agree, we are at least both civil. Thanks Elhonna.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Listen, I really think you have mistaken my tone. My intention is not to be rude, or condasending, or to create problems.
Ironically, my sentiments exactly in response to your last post to me, though I didn't say so at the time as it didn't seem like it would help.
No. Leave me alone.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I don't buy McDonalds due to their support from Planned Parenthood.
Post by
Magician22773
About 5 years ago or so, Target decided not to allow the Salvation Army "bell ringers" outside their store during Christmas season, because...get this....they didn't want to offend non-Christians.
Now, anyone who has ever been in Target, or any other retail store knows that during Christmas, they have no problem at all taking millions of our Christian dollars, but they decided to not allow a Christian charity to solicit donations at their store.
I havent been back to a Target store since. I also make a point to tell this story every year at church, and many of our church members have also stopped shopping there.
As for the rainbow oreo....I could really care less. Honestly, I doubt that anyone outside of facebook, and gay pride activists even knew about the picture existed. If I had seen it plastered on the wall at Wal-Mart, I probably would have complained (more to Wal-Mart, than to Kraft). Again, just like Obamas statement, it really doesn't show anything about how Kraft or Oreo feels about gays....its a marketing move.
Post by
FatalHeaven
#13: Introduce Goal Line Technology In Football?
At the moment, FIFA does not permit goal-line technology (GLT) or video replays during matches, although it is permitted for post-match disciplinary measures. In a 1970 meeting of the International Football Association Board, FIFA "requested the television authorities to refrain from any slow-motion play-back which reflected, or might reflect, adversely on any decision of the referee".
Yet despite this, controversy rages over the so-called ‘ghost’-goals that are all too frequent in the current game. However, on Wednesday May 4th, The Guardian newspaper reported that FIFA is set to consider the possibility of introducing goal-line technology in time for the 2012-13 season.
It is not the first time FIFA has requested that companies undergo a formal testing procedure but there is one key difference this time: they will be permitted to do so at a stadium of their own choosing. Previously, every one of the dozen or so companies who underwent the tests at FIFA House had fallen foul of the short set-up time and unrealistic conditions that were imposed there. There will be a number of strict criteria to satisfy in the two rounds of testing. Technologies must demonstrate a minimum of 90% accuracy in recognising whether both a static or a moving ball is across the line. Technologies must also inform the referee about goal-line incidents with both a vibration and a display signal to his watch, wherever he is on the pitch. The testing will be carried out under both daylight and floodlight conditions.
The news is expected to be welcomed by UK companies such as Hawk-Eye and Goalminder, who are convinced that their products are already 100% accurate. This announcement, coupled with FIFAs previously unrelenting stance on GLT, has re-ignited the technology debate.
Should GLT be introduced to global football?
Known Reasons For:
The introduction of technology is inevitable.
Technology is available.
GLT is used across a range of other sports.
Technology is more reliable than human judgement.
Known Reasons Against:
The dynamics of football as a game are very different from other sports which currently use technology.
The cost would not match FIFA's aim of opening football to the world.
Controversy and debate are a part of the game.
The cost of GLT is unjustified for a relatively rare scenario.
Todays topic brought to you by
iDebate.
Post by
Squishalot
To avoid keeping poorer countries from being part of FIFA, why not introduce it for multi-national tournaments only?
Or even bi-national matches, and have FIFA provide the gear if the host nation can't afford it. No need to force the introduction of it in domestic tournaments. Hawkeye is used in a very similar way - it's not used in domestic cricket or tennis matches.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
168916
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
Post by
FatalHeaven
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
Sigh. This is not once, not twice but three times my debate topics haven't been 'worthy' to you.
I don't pick any topic because it's of 'the utmost importance.' I pick them at random to get opinions on the actual matter. Telling people to get their priorities straight isn't taking part in the topic, it's just... I don't know. But it's not what I was hoping for, I guess is the best way to say it.
Also, as an extreme example, explain to me how (considering the fact some people play this sport professionally, and it is how they support their family) it is not worthy of being important?
Post by
Magician22773
About 5 years ago or so, Target decided not to allow the Salvation Army "bell ringers" outside their store during Christmas season, because...get this....they didn't want to offend non-Christians.
Now, anyone who has ever been in Target, or any other retail store knows that during Christmas, they have no problem at all taking millions of our Christian dollars, but they decided to not allow a Christian charity to solicit donations at their store.
No, they decided not to allow
anyone
to solicit donations. That had previously not allowed solicitation but made an exception for the Salvation Army, and then they decided to stop making an exception for one single charity while excluding all others.
yeeeeah....right.
Whats that other charity that traditionally stands in front of stores at Christmas time and collects donations? Oh yeah.....there isn't one.
You can package a turd up in a nice box with a bow on top, but inside, its still a pile of crap.
Post by
Squishalot
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
As with any other thread, MyTie, you're free not to post if it's not important to you. Don't troll others just because you're not interested in this particular topic.
Whats that other charity that traditionally stands in front of stores at Christmas time and collects donations? Oh yeah.....there isn't one.
I don't know about you guys, but we've got a huge number of charities that collect donations. It's a rare day that I don't see them on the walk to work.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##Squishalot##DELIM##
Post by
Magician22773
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
Fatal,
The only thing I can say about this choice of debate, is that soccer...er... football.....is pretty low on the list of American sports.
But....we have plenty of members in the forum that are from countries where it is a highly popular sport, so it
is
a relavent topic. Just don't be so shocked that some of us couldn't give a squat about a soccer debate. Around here, the only soccer games you will find are 10 year old kids at the YMCA.
Maybe either combine this debate with, or add in the future, instant replay in baseball (beyond the home run / foul pole rule we have now), and then maybe we all can participate.
Post by
FatalHeaven
Whats that other charity that traditionally stands in front of stores at Christmas time and collects donations? Oh yeah.....there isn't one.
He didn't say during Christmas time. The time of year the charities take place has nothing to do with the fact that no other Charity is allowed to stand outside Target, at ANY time of year, either.
For the record, I support the Salvation Army. I just don't see why it's a big deal if a corporation decides not to allow people to stand outside asking for donations. Again, regardless of time of year.
Post by
FatalHeaven
Around here, the only soccer games you will find are 10 year old kids at the YMCA.
Not where I'm from. And I AM an American. Oregon, Texas and Oklahoma (the states I have resided) all have soccer well outside of the YMCA.
My real point is that no matter the topic I choose and I have touched a wide spectrum of topics so far, imo, it is becoming a trend to see MyTie use one-liners to discredit a topic.
Topic #9: Who make better companions - cats or dogs? Why?
I kind of don't see this as a debate. I mean, the US Supreme Court just let down a major piece of legislation having to do with Arizona's Immigration Enforcement law. That is a potential gold mine of debate. Cats and dogs? No.
Topic #11: Simplify the English language?
There is no way to do this. Language isn't something that changes, unless through time, or military conquest. There is no for nor against.
You're right in there may be a "for" and "against". You might as well have a "for" and "against" for changing the rotation of our galaxy. While this might be theoretically possible, the sheer difficulty makes any discussion about it academic.
Topic #12: Rainbow Oreo: Worth Boycotting Kraft Foods?
A couple of facebook users slur homosexuals and that is a "boycott".
OH THE HUMANITY!
You all know, if that self-victimization wheel stops rolling for a split second it will fall over. Gotta keep it going.
Topic #13: Introduce Goal Line Technology In Football?
I think the fact that this is a matter of importance to people at all illustrates the lack of priorities of the world.
I'm not even trying to start a hatefest cause it's not worth my time, but I'm trying to point out my reasoning for saying
Sigh. This is not once, not twice but three times my debate topics haven't been 'worthy' to you.
I don't pick any topic because it's of 'the utmost importance.' I pick them at random to get opinions on the actual matter. Telling people to get their priorities straight isn't taking part in the topic, it's just... I don't know. But it's not what I was hoping for, I guess is the best way to say it.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.