[Royal Society] All-Party Debate

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

S:reu moderator, the MRPT leader has made quite a series of claims, and ended with a direct question to my party. Am I allowed to answer him, or would that forfeit my chance at my own rebuttal?

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Feb 2, 2016 11:26:29 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

S:reu moderator, the MRPT leader has made quite a series of claims, and ended with a direct question to my party. Am I allowed to answer him, or would that forfeit my chance at my own rebuttal?

You are allowed to answer that specific question.

However, please, Rebuttals shouldn't come as a question. It wasn't in the rules when the MRPT posted its question, but it is now.

However, if you decide to address the claims outside of your closing statement, it will be considered your rebuttal.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Thank you. I will address the questions of the MRPT leader and make my own rebuttal later in the day.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

Feb 2, 2016 12:12:46 GMT -6 Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. said:

Feb 2, 2016 11:26:29 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

S:reu moderator, the MRPT leader has made quite a series of claims, and ended with a direct question to my party. Am I allowed to answer him, or would that forfeit my chance at my own rebuttal?

You are allowed to answer that specific question.

However, please, Rebuttals shouldn't come as a question. It wasn't in the rules when the MRPT posted its question, but it is now.

However, if you decide to address the claims outside of your closing statement, it will be considered your rebuttal.

Interjecting here as the debate organizer. Rules should not be added mid-debate.

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Feb 2, 2016 13:08:28 GMT -6 Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă said:

Feb 2, 2016 12:12:46 GMT -6 Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H. said:

You are allowed to answer that specific question.

However, please, Rebuttals shouldn't come as a question. It wasn't in the rules when the MRPT posted its question, but it is now.

However, if you decide to address the claims outside of your closing statement, it will be considered your rebuttal.

Interjecting here as the debate organizer. Rules should not be added mid-debate.

I fully understand your point of view.

What should we do? 

If I allow questions, when anyone could ask a question to the MRPT, for example, but since they already had their rebuttal, they will not be able to answer.

Granted, they can answer in their closing statement, but what if a question is asked in a closing statement to a party who already had their closing statement?

Allowing a question should give the right to answer that question, but the format of the debate doesn't allow for unlimited answer.

I defer to you therefore and ask how would you think I should resolve this particular issue?

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

We have to remain fair to all the parties. The leader of the MRPT probably should not have used a rebuttal to ask a question. The RUMP leader is right in wanting to answer that question. However, the structure of the debate should be followed unless we want to open the floodgates and let the leaders start asking the debate questions. If I were Sir Alexandreu, I'd use my rebuttal to answer the question while expanding on the other points he wishes to rebut.

I'm not the moderator, and I do have partisan ideals so please understand I am not trying to stop something and ultimately, it is up to the moderator as the person trusted to resolve this.

[Lüc da Schir]

He could answer in a separate thread, or during his closing statement, IMO. I didn't mean to break the rules of the debate by asking a question; sorry about that, MPF and AD.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

Feb 2, 2016 13:33:18 GMT -6 Lüc da Schir said:

He could answer in a separate thread, or during his closing statement, IMO. I didn't mean to break the rules of the debate by asking a question; sorry about that, MPF and AD.

I'm sure it was unintentional :-)

[Miestrâ Schivâ, UrN]

Yep. I think the ModRad leader's closing question should be declared "rhetorical" and AD should respond outside this debate.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Feb 2, 2016 13:32:10 GMT -6 Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă said:

We have to remain fair to all the parties. The leader of the MRPT probably should not have used a rebuttal to ask a question. The RUMP leader is right in wanting to answer that question. However, the structure of the debate should be followed unless we want to open the floodgates and let the leaders start asking the debate questions. If I were Sir Alexandreu, I'd use my rebuttal to answer the question while expanding on the other points he wishes to rebut.

I'm not the moderator, and I do have partisan ideals so please understand I am not trying to stop something and ultimately, it is up to the moderator as the person trusted to resolve this.

Well, I feel in an awkward position. I don't want to cause a fuss, but I also want to do my best for my party. It doesn't seem great that I either get the choice of allowing a lengthy set of accusations and a direct question go unchallenged -- and it rather needs to be challenged! -- or that the RUMP be the only party not permitted to rebut one of the previous questions. This is our only chance to do some debating during this debate.

I'll abide by whatever the moderator decides. If guess if there's no right of reply permitted, we can all just make some accusations and ask questions that the other people won't get a chance to reply to (unless they sacrifice their rebuttal or closing statement for that purpose). That would be a shame, though.

EDIT: So, what's the verdict?

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

My decision was simple, no questions asked to other parties during the rebuttals. The organizer over-ruled me.

I am not sure where to go from here.

I'd say to ignore the question here, and just reply elsewhere on Wittenberg.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

Huh, and here I thought the whole point of a non-partisan moderator was that they would make those sorts of calls

Okay, fair enough. I'll post my chosen rebuttal tonight.

[Marti-Pair Furxheir S.H.]

Feb 3, 2016 17:34:48 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

Huh, and here I thought the whole point of a non-partisan moderator was that they would make those sorts of calls ;)

Okay, fair enough. I'll post my chosen rebuttal tonight.

For the next election, I will organize a debate myself, host it myself, and manage the rules myself.

I'll get help from the new Grand-Father should he want to, but that way, I'll be able to make a quick decision.

Remember, even if I am the moderator of the debate, I am but a guest here, and I moderate from a mandate from the Royal Society.

For the next Cosa, I'll moderate as Secretary of State, with the Chancery hosting.

[Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă]

For the record, I never overruled the moderator. I put in my suggestion as the rules were originally laid out and made it clear the moderator should make the final call.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

With respect, Dr. dal Nordselva, after the moderator made a clear decision, you interjected as "debate organizer" and directed that "rules should not be added mid-debate." To all appearances, you seemed to be over-ruling the moderator's decision to... well, add a rule about no direct questions during rebuttals.

Be that as it may, though, I'm happy to roll with the punches We've taken up enough time with this, and I'll move on to my rebuttal.