Thursday, December 29, 2005

Spout Off: Rules and Regulations

All right, things seem to be moving forward nicely with the whole spout off thing. There's even been some talk about having it be a roaming event between a few sites. Also of having different people take on the participant's role. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing any of that happen.

In any scenario, I just wanted to set some ground rules for my version of this, simply for the sake of clarity later on. I'm still debating whether I want to set this up Lincoln-Douglass style (JJ and LH would be given the topic and the stance they have to adopt; i.e. - pro or con) or to simply let one or the other go first and let things happen willy nilly. There are arguments to be made for both. I guess that will depend on the topic. Otherwise:

Firstly, the idea is to have this be funny and entertaining, not necessarily to stuff your opinions down the other person's throat.

The idea is debate and discourse, not grandstanding. The idea is to challenge and be challenged.

In light of this, I, as moderator, will not brook any unnecessary slams on either party. Also, the air of superiority will be quickly deflated by me, should I note its presence.

As I know both JJ and LH are wont to simply quote books or name philosophies, I will be making sure points are clarified. So don't be surprised if I ask you to parse something out. Failure to do so will weaken your argument. Deal with it.

Lastly, I simply hate over-simplification. If the basis of your argument is to "burn the motherfucker down," to use a recent example, be prepared to expound on that...JJ.

I will update this later, to announce the topic and format.

Update: Okay, let's go with "It should be harder to get married/easier to get a divorce." Let me flip a coin here (I'm actually doing this)...LH, you get to start.

Okay, you have two - three paragraphs to state your case, whatever it may be. Send it to me via email, and I'll post it here, as well as sending a copy to JJ. When JJ sends his reply to me, I'll post that too.

All right, kids, have fun.


At 8:02 AM, Blogger JJisafool said...

"Lastly, I simply hate over-simplification. If the basis of your argument is to "burn the motherfucker down," to use a recent example, be prepared to expound on that...JJ."

Dude. Unfair. I expounded what I meant to you, just didn't have time to post it.

And, what, you can't handle allusion, hyperbole or metaphor? Are you sure you can moderate the Hound and I? I mean, like, maybe we should send you the CliffNotes or something.

At 9:13 AM, Blogger thelyamhound said...

If you want me to cc JJ (hee hee--initials are funny), I'll need his email addy. Could you send me an email with that, oh beige one?

At 11:50 AM, Blogger thelyamhound said...

Beige, you've been sent my response on this matter. JJ, I didn't cc you in on it, 'cause I don't have your email address. Hopefully Jose will either remedy that situation or forward my 3 paragraphs to you.

I wonder if we'll really disagree all that much on this one.

At 12:01 PM, Blogger the beige one said...

And, what, you can't handle allusion, hyperbole or metaphor?

Dude, go nuts, just deal with the challenges as they come.

Ly, I got your reply, and forwarded to JJ. We'll see where the cards fall momentarily.

At 4:58 PM, Blogger Missuz J said...

I'm all a flutter that you chose a topic I suggested. Can't wait to see what comes next!

At 9:09 AM, Blogger thelyamhound said...

Having seen, via email, JJ's take, I'm wondering: Once posted, is there any plan for follow-up? Rebuttal, redirection, concessions, "yes, but", that sort of thing? If not, so much the better; if so, well, also so much the better. Just curious.

At 12:49 PM, Blogger the beige one said...

Yeah, the idea was to have the commentary-fallout between you two and everyone else opinion take place in the comments field.

Just got JJ's input, I'm about to post it...this one's gonna be interesting.


Post a Comment

<< Home