Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
User avatar
been-there
Posts: 10794
Joined: 30 Apr 2013, 08:59

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by been-there »

I have closed the topic (debate?).
I just sent a message to Nessie explaining why and disapproving his last submission.

Here is the explanation for posterity:
Debaters do not get to decide who lied or to call each other liars on this section of the forum.
The suggestion I understood from both of you was that the moderator would decide that.
You are both repeatedly breaking the forum rules; calling each other names and arguing with ‘bad faith’, while adding no information or references to holocaust subject matter.
I rejected three posts from Bobcat today for such infringements.
And now I received a similar rule-infringing post from Nessie.
I therefore decline to continue moderating this disagreement.
Continue your squabble on the previous thread, if you want. You will need to request it be unlocked from one of the moderators of the rest of RODOH.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 33654
Joined: 07 Mar 2014, 17:00
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie »

The post you have disapproved, was me pointing out Bobcat is not following the rules and by his rule, I have won the debate, since he has lied that I admitted there is no archaeological proof of mass graves at TII.

Been-there, unless you can quote me verbatim admitting there is no archaeological proof of mass graves at TII, then I have won the debate.
User avatar
Charles Traynor
Posts: 3506
Joined: 15 Jun 2012, 20:53
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Charles Traynor »

been-there wrote: 05 Jul 2021, 20:40 I have closed the topic (debate?).
Good call. The debate started badly and degenerated from bad to worse from there on in.


As far as I am concerned Nessie won the debate. Unfortunately for Nessie the debate avoided any discussion of the holocaust and instead concentrated on the semantics of the rules the participants would be using. :lol:


Please do not allow Bobcat or any future incarnations of the troll in the Formal Debate Forum again.


The editing of posts by formal debate participants needs to be looked at as a matter of urgency.
Bobcat
Posts: 480
Joined: 19 May 2021, 14:56
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bobcat »

Nessie:
Bobcat is refusing to abide by rules he agreed upon
Interesting, especially since what it is that I agreed upon.
Bobcat:
Are you afraid to accept this challenge... Yes. - or - No. - ??
Nessie:
No.
Bobcat:
If I can conclusively demonstrate to the moderator that a statement of fact that can be attributed to you here in this thread or one that you make in our formal debate is a lie, then the debate is over and the moderator will declare that I am the winner.
Nessie:
I will accept that, if you accept that rule also applies to you
Bobcat:
OK, But If the rule applies to both of us, then it will be the ONLY additional rule added to these rules:
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=2492
Nessie, you seem have forgotten this:
OK, But If the rule applies to both of us, then it will be the ONLY additional rule added to these rules:
viewtopic.php?p=192210#p192210
And the fact that you made it official with this:
Bobcat, as requested, to make it "official"
viewtopic.php?p=192346#p192346
Last edited by Bobcat on 07 Jul 2021, 20:17, edited 2 times in total.
Bobcat
Posts: 480
Joined: 19 May 2021, 14:56
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bobcat »

been-there wrote: 05 Jul 2021, 20:40 I have closed the topic (debate?).
I just sent a message to Nessie explaining why and disapproving his last submission.

Here is the explanation for posterity:
Debaters do not get to decide who lied or to call each other liars on this section of the forum.
The suggestion I understood from both of you was that the moderator would decide that.
You are both repeatedly breaking the forum rules; calling each other names and arguing with ‘bad faith’, while adding no information or references to holocaust subject matter.
I rejected three posts from Bobcat today for such infringements.
And now I received a similar rule-infringing post from Nessie.
I therefore decline to continue moderating this disagreement.
Continue your squabble on the previous thread, if you want. You will need to request it be unlocked from one of the moderators of the rest of RODOH.
That's too bad been-there. Thanks for your effort.
Bobcat
Posts: 480
Joined: 19 May 2021, 14:56
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bobcat »

Nessie:
Bobcat needs to defend his claim that I admitted there is no archaeological proof, in that thread.


I already did that Nessie:
Nessie:
Bobcat seems surprised I said that archaeology does not prove what happened at TII.

viewtopic.php?p=191737#p191737
Of course, you can clarify your above statement, and determine who won the debate, by answering this one simple question:
The MAXIMUM number of discernable / measurable extant mass graves of Treblinka II that you can conclusively prove actually exist, and in which legitimate archaeologists have, via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented methodology - conclusively proven to currently contain the remains of at least 2 people; is no less than __?__.
One would think that a person who earlier alleged that there Is no archaeological proof of mass graves at Treblinka II and that archaeology does not prove what happened at TII, and who is now alleging that he's changed his mind, would be more than happy to clarify his current position on the matter.

Nessie, failure to answer the above question is ipso facto proof that your earlier allegation that there Is no archaeological proof of mass graves at Treblinka II is correct and that I won the debate.
Bobcat
Posts: 480
Joined: 19 May 2021, 14:56
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bobcat »

Charles Traynor wrote: 06 Jul 2021, 18:06
been-there wrote: 05 Jul 2021, 20:40 I have closed the topic (debate?).
Good call. The debate started badly and degenerated from bad to worse from there on in.
The debate degenerated because Nessie was ignoring this reality:
Nessie:
I will accept that, if you accept that rule also applies to you
Bobcat:
OK, But If the rule applies to both of us, then it will be the ONLY additional rule added to these rules:

viewtopic.php?f=28&t=2492
viewtopic.php?p=192210#p192210
Which Been-there allowed. And he also allowed Nessie to post this:
Unless you can link to and quote me clearly admitting that there is no archaeological proof of mass graves at TII, then it is proved that is a lie.
Which was a gross misinterpretation of the clarifying statement attached to the thread title.

Then Nessie was allowed to submit a post dodging this question:
The MAXIMUM number of discernable / measurable extant mass graves of Treblinka II that you can conclusively prove actually exist, and in which legitimate archaeologists have, via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented methodology - conclusively proven to currently contain the remains of at least 2 people; is no less than __?__.
which was filled with ad hominems and more inaccuracies than I can count. And in which, Nessie declared himself the winner and then ran away - which we all knew he would do.
Bobcat
Posts: 480
Joined: 19 May 2021, 14:56
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Bobcat »

Nessie wrote: 05 Jul 2021, 20:44 I have won the debate, since he [Bobcat] has lied that I admitted there is no archaeological proof of mass graves at TII.
If there is proof of mass graves at TII Nessie, then why are you running from this simple question:
Nessie,

The MAXIMUM number of discernable / measurable extant mass graves of Treblinka II that you can conclusively prove actually exist, and in which legitimate archaeologists have, via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented methodology - conclusively proven to currently contain the remains of at least 2 people; is no less than __?__.

And Nessie's answer is: __?__
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 33654
Joined: 07 Mar 2014, 17:00
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Nessie »

Bobcat wrote: 07 Jul 2021, 19:37 Nessie:
Bobcat is refusing to abide by rules he agreed upon
Interesting, especially since what it is that I agreed upon.
Bobcat:
Are you afraid to accept this challenge... Yes. - or - No. - ??
Nessie:
No.
Bobcat:
If I can conclusively demonstrate to the moderator that a statement of fact that can be attributed to you here in this thread or one that you make in our formal debate is a lie, then the debate is over and the moderator will declare that I am the winner.
Nessie:
I will accept that, if you accept that rule also applies to you
Bobcat:
OK, But If the rule applies to both of us, then it will be the ONLY additional rule added to these rules:
viewtopic.php?f=28&t=2492
Nessie, you seem have forgotten this:
OK, But If the rule applies to both of us, then it will be the ONLY additional rule added to these rules:
viewtopic.php?p=192210#p192210
And the fact that you made it official with this:
Bobcat, as requested, to make it "official"
viewtopic.php?p=192346#p192346
My reference to "official" was not about the rule change, it was about that first question, which you had already posted and then refused to answer.

The thread was locked and the rule change made "official" before I had been given a chance to reply. I did not agree to that rule change. I only agreed to the previously agreed upon rules, with my rules 1-3 and your rule about lying.

I decided to go ahead anyway, since I knew I was going to prove you had lied with the thread title.
User avatar
Hüntinger
Posts: 11014
Joined: 20 Aug 2018, 04:56
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: Open Thread for COMMENTS questions in new subforum

Post by Hüntinger »

Nessie wrote: 08 Jul 2021, 09:45 The thread was locked and the change made "official" before I had been given a chance to reply. I did not agree to that change. I only agree to the previously agreed upon rules, with my rules 1-3 and your rule about lying.
Jude face it, you obfuscated to avoid confrontation and now continuing after the event. Very very jüdische. Tis but a scratch.
Post Reply