I always wanted to start an overmoderated forum for debating on various topics, bringing it to the "ideal" debate as close as possible. Basically the Venezuela scene from Parks and Rec - you use an ad hominem? Believe it or not, banned. Personal attack? Instantly banned. Arguing in bad faith? Banned. Ignoring everything the other side said and just ranting? Also jail.

[–] Sanyanov 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

At some point people will be too afraid to start a debate in the first place, and you'll end up with a circlejerk club.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the idea of holding super civil debate, but at some point people will - at least unintentionally - use some of that. It might be better to raise a culture of catching them on that - and, potentially, issuing a warning.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Yeah, I think a warning/increasingly long temporary ban system could make this work. Any time a fallacy is used, a comment is added describing why it's a fallacy and a warning is issued (and temporary ban depending on how many warnings you have recently). Maybe it tracks which fallacy was reported and the sentence is harsher if you repeatedly use the same ones, and some are worth more than others. Idk. I think it could work.

[–] Maalus 1 points 11 months ago

Yea, that's why I didn't do it in the first place lol