Talk:Advocacy - Revision history

Robert Brockway: Blanked the page

2014-01-08T08:45:44Z

Blanked the page

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:45, 8 January 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I'm new to the movement (being vocal and open about it anyway) but I have been informalyl debating online and offline for more than 22 years. I cut my teeth in the free and open source community. This is a community of mostly men that give no quarter in debates. If you make a mistake in your argument they will be all over it.

	I always take the high moral ground when debating - I stick to the facts. If I can't back it up I don't say it. I never ever make ad hominem attacks. I hold to the position that when someone makes an ad hominem attack they are conceding their opponent's point - if they could attack the argument on merit they would be better off doing so. If they make the attack personal I conclude they could not attack the argument on merit and so are conceding it. Better to say nothing than to get personal. More on this later but I'm going to be encouraging MHRAs to debate from the high moral ground. If you look at the way many ideological feminists debate it can get very nasty and personal.

Robert Brockway: Robert Brockway moved page Talk:Debating to Talk:Advocacy

2014-01-08T03:27:35Z

Robert Brockway moved page Talk:Debating to Talk:Advocacy

← Older revision	Revision as of 03:27, 8 January 2014
(No difference)

Robert Brockway: Created page with "I'm new to the movement (being vocal and open about it anyway) but I have been informalyl debating online and offline for more than 22 years. I cut my teeth in the free and op..."

2014-01-08T03:21:22Z

Created page with "I'm new to the movement (being vocal and open about it anyway) but I have been informalyl debating online and offline for more than 22 years. I cut my teeth in the free and op..."

New page

I'm new to the movement (being vocal and open about it anyway) but I have been informalyl debating online and offline for more than 22 years. I cut my teeth in the free and open source community. This is a community of mostly men that give no quarter in debates. If you make a mistake in your argument they will be all over it.

I always take the high moral ground when debating - I stick to the facts. If I can't back it up I don't say it. I never ever make ad hominem attacks. I hold to the position that when someone makes an ad hominem attack they are conceding their opponent's point - if they could attack the argument on merit they would be better off doing so. If they make the attack personal I conclude they could not attack the argument on merit and so are conceding it. Better to say nothing than to get personal. More on this later but I'm going to be encouraging MHRAs to debate from the high moral ground. If you look at the way many ideological feminists debate it can get very nasty and personal.