Your very own usergroup

[otseng]

Now, you can have your very own usergroup. Post in this thread the name that you'd like. I'll make sure the name conforms to the standards of this site and deduct 2500 tokens from you. Then, you'll be the owner and member of that usergroup. By default, people will be able to freely join your group. Or you can choose to confirm membership requests.

To request your personal usergroup, provide the following:
- Name of usergroup (40 character limit)
- Description (255 character limit)
- Note if you want to confirm membership from others (default will be no)

For an additional charge of 10,000 tokens, you can also have your own subforum for your usergroup. Please provide the following info:
- Name of usergroup (40 character limit)
- Description (80 character limit)

Subforum activity requirement:
- Subforums must maintain some activity in it. Subforums that do not have any activity for six months can get removed (posts made to simply bump threads do not count). There will be no refunds given for any subforums removed.

Additional restrictions:
- Do not add people to your group without their permission. Otherwise I will delete your group.
- Descriptions cannot point to personal websites. If a link is found to point to inappropriate and/or offensive material, the group will be deleted.

1/3/2011 Modification:
- Changed group price from 500 to 1000 tokens
- Changed subforum price from 2000 to 5000 tokens

1/12/2013 Modification:
- Added subforum activity requirement

12/31/2016 Modification:
- Changed group price from 1000 to 2500 tokens
- Changed subforum price from 5000 to 10,000 tokens

[McCulloch]

It is sometimes difficult to know when you may have won a point in debate. If the opposition does not respond, it could be that they are no longer interested in that topic or may have lost track. Therefore honest debaters will admit in a post when the arguments against him or her have prevailed and the position that he had been supporting has been shown to be in error. Therefore, I propose a new group.

Name: Admits Mistakes
Description:

• Open to those who have admitted, on Debating Christianity that they have made mistakes.

In order to be accepted into this group, send a link to a post where you have admitted to have been in error to McCulloch. It does not have to a complete change of your world-view, but it should not be a simple error in a matter of fact, unless the fact is central to your argument. The matter should be on in which you have argued on one side where you have since publicly admitted that you were wrong.

Here is an example displaying my own eligibility.

[Jester]

In response to some fanciful and/or loaded definitions of the central term in our debates, I propose the "Princeton Definition" Group.


For purposes of debate, members of this group agree to define the term "Christianity" in the same fashion as this definition from Princeton University:

1) a monotheistic system of beliefs and practices based on the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus as embodied in the New Testament and emphasizing the role of Jesus as savior

Members agree to refer to Christianity by this definition alone, and will take care to be both clear and consistent in the use of all specific terms during debate. Members will never deviate from a definition without direct permission from the opposed debater. Nor will they insist on a definition for a term that cannot be supported by a dictionary.

By accepting this definition, members agree that establishing Christians as being either morally superior or morally inferior to non-theists does nothing to establish the truth or falsehood of Christian beliefs. Therefore, subscribed members commit themselves to abstaining from any kind of general attack on the moral characters of others on the grounds that such is unproductive and hurtful.

[otseng]

Name: Admits Mistakes

Group created. 500 tokens deducted.

Sorry I missed this request earlier. Does this qualify me to join the group?

[otseng]

In response to some fanciful and/or loaded definitions of the central term in our debates, I propose the “Princeton Definition” Group.

Group created. 500 tokens deducted.

[McCulloch]

Name: Admits Mistakes

Group created. 500 tokens deducted.

Sorry I missed this request earlier. Does this qualify me to join the group?

I was going to create it myself and deduct the tokens, but I got sidetracked.

This would qualify you for membership only if you have argued that you have not missed this type of request or if you do not miss this type of request. :sorry:

[Cathar1950]

Name: Admits Mistakes

Group created. 500 tokens deducted.

Sorry I missed this request earlier. Does this qualify me to join the group?

I was going to create it myself and deduct the tokens, but I got sidetracked.

This would qualify you for membership only if you have argued that you have not missed this type of request or if you do not miss this type of request. :sorry:

I am sure I have made mistakes but I don't recall all of them and can't remember any right off hand. I change my mind all the time. Usually when I am thinking or reading about something I might change my mind a number of times as I wrestle with a concept.
Of course I am always misspelling something or get my grammar messed up.
But I speak and read English and it is a Germatic(spelling anyone?) language with Latin rules and it should be expected now and then. But I can join in good faith the "Makes Mistakes" user group in good faith as I am sure I have and will.
I ofter forget things. Is that a mistake or just senility?

[McCulloch]

I am sure I have made mistakes but I don't recall all of them and can't remember any right off hand. I change my mind all the time. Usually when I am thinking or reading about something I might change my mind a number of times as I wrestle with a concept.
Of course I am always misspelling something or get my grammar messed up.
But I speak and read English and it is a Germatic(spelling anyone?) language with Latin rules and it should be expected now and then. But I can join in good faith the "Makes Mistakes" user group in good faith as I am sure I have and will.
I ofter forget things. Is that a mistake or just senility?

But this is not the "Makes Mistakes" group. What would be the point of that, we all make mistakes. In debate, the honourable thing to do is to admit, publicly and openly when we find that a position that we have been arguing for has been shot down.

[Cathar1950]

I am sure I have made mistakes but I don't recall all of them and can't remember any right off hand. I change my mind all the time. Usually when I am thinking or reading about something I might change my mind a number of times as I wrestle with a concept.
Of course I am always misspelling something or get my grammar messed up.
But I speak and read English and it is a Germatic(spelling anyone?) language with Latin rules and it should be expected now and then. But I can join in good faith the "Makes Mistakes" user group in good faith as I am sure I have and will.
I ofter forget things. Is that a mistake or just senility?

But this is not the "Makes Mistakes" group. What would be the point of that, we all make mistakes. In debate, the honorable thing to do is to admit, publicly and openly when we find that a position that we have been arguing for has been shot down.

I try not to argue positions that can get shot down or I wouldn't hold them.
Unless I am just being a pain of course.
At this point there have been many claims that others and myself have been "Busted" or some such nonsense but I have not seen it happen and I think you might agree it is not much more then idol bragging and wrong-headed claims.
When I read a book I look at the endnotes or footnotes and many times read the book that is mentioned. Like so many of these discussions or arguments we have to rely on little or no information and when arguing with dogma the only mistake we can make is confidence. I usually don't reach, dispite the charges, as I see many apologist do, for anything that conforms to some indoctrination or dogma I hold. I try to stay within the bounds of what is known. But I am willing and able to change or admit a mistake if the arguments are persuasive and reasonable. Anyone that tries to learn does at least that much and I am to old for pride. I think my largest problem comes from those that claim their opinion or belief are fact when there is no compelling reason to think such is "Fact". If any part of the Torah was inerrant they would have stoped with the first book written and that seems to be the "J" part of the Torah.

[Beto]

If we simply admit to a mistake we might be breaking rule number 9. It doesn't really add value to the debate. Perhaps the rule should be amended.

[McCulloch]

If we simply admit to a mistake we might be breaking rule number 9. It doesn't really add value to the debate. Perhaps the rule should be amended.

I think that the other mods would agree with me that admitting that a position that you have held and have argued for you now consider wrong, does add value to the debate and does not violate rule 9.

Bad: Amen.
Bad: That's right.
Good: You're right. I see now that my previous position was incorrect.