Posts by steelridge58

You guys actually just reminded me of an old post I wrote about sixteen years ago
back when my username was viviana

This is the space where we can all dive into the discussion for round eleven
.
Mick Jagger managed to take the win last time, so huge congrats on that one more time.

It’s going to be a pretty interesting ride, honestly, because since our next topic shifts toward modern philosophical thought, we'll be stepping out of our comfort zone and testing the waters in much more contemporary territory
.
👍

We already shook hands on the idea at the very start that there aren't any restrictions here, and honestly, since everything is running so smoothly just the way it is, I really don't see any reason why we should go changing a single thing.

Nah.

Jonathan Brooks8 said:It might actually be quite useful if the original poster weighed in within the comments to share who they personally felt provided the right answer... It wouldn't be mandatory, of course, and it certainly wouldn't interfere with the democratic nature of the voting process, but I think it would be rather interesting to hear their perspective, wouldn't it?

It really would be interesting.

👍

So, I’ll make sure to remind the person who posted the question about this suggestion once the deadline for submitting answers has passed.

In Round 8, the winners were the responses provided by Verdader and arna
. After we all touched base on who should lead the next round, arna
will be the one posing our new question.

arna said:I’ve been thinking lately—why on earth did humanity decide that our way of life should be defined by division, constant conflict, and endless competition, rather than choosing a path rooted in unity, cooperation, and genuine community?

The thread is open for entries until Tuesday, August 17th, 2021, at 9 PM!

Topic for commenting

Every forum user gets just one shot per round, and you can only participate using a single profile.
If you feel like you can't quite find the right words to beat a powerful quote from an expert that resonates with you, feel free to use that quote as your own entry, just make sure you credit the source properly.
We’ll have a separate thread open specifically for discussing and debating the entries.
Once the deadline passes, the topic will close and we'll launch a poll that stays active for four days; please vote in good faith—we won't tolerate any foul play, and if anyone tries anything shady, the moderator will step in and handle it however they see fit.
The winner gets to set the next question.

voting system:

Multiple votes allowed

You can cast a vote for just one response or pick several if you're feeling inspired.

steelridge58 posted something in the Comments section, so I figured we should probably keep the conversation going over here

steelridge58 said:I honestly feel like stretching out the window for posts and voting just ends up diluting the whole topic in a way that feels really messy.

The extension was originally just a suggestion that eventually became reality, and now we actually have some real-world experience to look back on.

Personally, I’m starting to think we might actually need to shorten the voting period because four days just feels like an eternity,
though I'm still a little bit unsure about how much time we should give people to provide their responses.

So, please, feel free to share whatever thoughts or impressions you have right here

(mostly so we can get ourselves sorted out before the next round kicks off).

I honestly don't see how, it feels like we're just overcomplicating things for no reason at all
and I’m not even being particularly serious about this, especially since the actual question being debated here was really just
- whether you can actually vote for yourself; that's pretty much it.

ruggedraven36 said:Shame on you for mocking my suggestion. I'm being serious here, and you're just laughing. You remind me way too much of those Nietzschean "last men."
The two of you can stop addressing me—directly or indirectly—and I'll do the same for you. I have zero respect for you.

Good grief, Jack

I actually can't believe this

...

👎

I honestly feel like things would be a whole lot more engaging if we actually had a larger turnout from voters here
and besides, the voting process is really just an essential part of this entire discussion

So please, go out there and support it!

(as a whole)

😉)

Harold Doyle3 said:There ought to be a choice of the three right answers... then we can see whether you actually voted for yourself or not.

But if we did that, who on earth would bother coming up with a new question in the first place?

Should we hold a vote on that too?
😁 🙂))

So, I went ahead and put together a little poll, so feel free to jump in and cast your vote whenever you have a second.

Whoops!

tapatalk
😁

Jonathan Brooks8 said:I am formally requesting that the administration here at the forum acquire a software tool capable of implementing the Single-party proposal.

Poll responses—beyond the standard (multiple) choices of this—that should definitely include:
1. I have no idea, and this is my final word
2. I have no idea, but I might give it some thought...
3. None of the above
4. None of the above except for my own, provided I haven't already stated otherwise
5. Not in a million years
6. Love you all
7. I’m retracting my vote; I want to cast it again

Hahahaha

Good

hahaha Good Occam's razor is actually the perfect tool for this situation

Just cut through it, or maybe trim everything down one by one
🙂))

hiddeneagle98 said:It’s not unethical if the other person already cast their vote for themselves.

And if they didn't, would that other person have voted either?

hiddeneagle98 said:tapatalk

🙂))

To be honest, my bigger headache—if you can even call it that—is more about the people who hang out in the "Answers" section but just don't bother to vote, that overall lack of engagement, which really makes me wonder
- what the hell is driving that behavior?

James Lee77 said:Should we vote on whether we even want to vote first? 🙂 Nah. It’s fine as it is, though maybe things wouldn't be too bad if we did it anyway.

Hahaha, yeah, sure, why not just take a detour through a circle instead?

😁

If you let someone vote for themselves, it opens the door to all sorts of math games and manipulation—like if there’s a tie and someone just casts their own vote to tip the scales in their favor—and while I really don't think anyone in our group would actually stoop to that level, the system would technically allow it to happen.

So, is that even fair?

Personally, I don't think it is.
But look, I can go ahead and set up a poll asking whether we should even permit self-voting, so we can all weigh in on it together, okay?

Edit: The poll is live now.

And honestly, there’s a real chance this could turn into something totally immoral, since that kind of influence just opens the door wide for people to start manipulating votes...

So, for those reasons, I have to say no to the proposal.

😁

Maybe we should switch to a two-week cycle for the next round, and instead of just this quick two-day window, we could set aside three or four days for voting to make it easier on everyone.

Amanda Jackson5 actually brought up a question in the Comment section about whether someone is allowed to vote for themselves, though I honestly haven't a clue myself.
I’d really love to get your take on this—what do you all think?
If we all decide that self-voting is okay, then I'll go ahead and update the rules, but if not, we can just leave everything exactly as it stands now.