# A New Style of Debate



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

[Cut because jokes are apparently too confusing]

Bare essentials: on any topic, we most often speak of our broad ideologies and our overarching principles, frequently ignoring (both deliberately and accidentally) when questions are asked about some small but possibly important details. My proposal is that if you want TC discussions to be coherent, useful, and actually reach some _answers_ it would be a thousand times better to ask succinct, direct questions one at a time, and be willing to give direct answers to such questions, holding your hands up when you simply don't know enough on the subject.

I think it is also of particular importance on a forum to acknowledge when someone in an open thread has asked a specific question, and either wait for it to be answered, or attempt to get it answered, so that it does not end up drowned in the discussion.

This doesn't mean that you have to limit yourself, or that certain discussions can only be open to a select few individuals. It's just a call to be aware of what _everyone_ is saying, listening more, and being considerate of the fact that threads can quickly pile up in length, but we each want to have our say. This way, threads hopefully won't become a case of the loudest (or craziest) voices getting all the attention.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

While I don't disagree with you in theory, TalkClassical has a membership that ranges from people who have professional status in music to those who may not 'read a note' but care passionately about the music and such discussions of style, form, content, etc., are areas they have intuitions about, valid intuitions, possibly more valid than Professor So and So's, but how can the site work as one devoted to people who love classical music if there is an air of 'intimate but intimidating' debate? If I've totally missed your point, please inform me...I'm not dismissing your idea by any means, just asking for clarification. Personally, I'm not looking for this site to stress me out...so the idea of debate jumps on my non-confrontational ears a bit. Thanks for any input. NH


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

NightHawk said:


> While I don't disagree with you in theory, TalkClassical has a membership that ranges from people who have professional status in music to those who may not 'read a note' but care passionately about the music and such discussions of style, form, content, etc., are areas they have intuitions about, valid intuitions, possibly more valid than Professor So and So's, but how can the site work as one devoted to people who love classical music if there is an air of 'intimate but intimidating' debate? If I've totally missed your point, please inform me...I'm not dismissing your idea by any means, just asking for clarification. Personally, I'm not looking for this site to stress me out...so the idea of debate jumps on my non-confrontational ears a bit. Thanks for any input. NH


The "intimate but intimidating" part was just part of the jokey section of my post - of course I want TC to retain it's (usually) relaxed atmosphere!  My main gripe is that we all just tend to shout over each other a lot, and it can get very frustrating. Some might prefer that sense of chaos, but I like things orderly! And if we actually want to educate each other - whether it's on music or something more contentious - then I think we all need to slow down a little and listen more often.

As perhaps suggested by your post as well, I think it's too common here that the valid intuitions of the non-educated are dismissed or ignored by those who can flaunt a bit of music theory, Latin labels, or quote the odd philosopher. I think "down to earth" is the term that I'd like to describe TC as, but which I don't think it is at the moment.


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

While I don't disagree with you in theory, TalkClassical has a membership that ranges from people who have professional status in music to those who may not 'read a note' but care passionately about the music and such discussions of style, form, content, etc.,

I would also add that TalkClassical is frequently by a membership who sometimes have lives beyond the confines of TalkClassical... or the internet as a whole. I would assume that it is quite possible that many post a comments and then don't check back until much later in the day... or even at a later date. To expect two members to go to it in debate with time limitations while a group of others sit by in judgment is not realistic.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

StlukesguildOhio said:


> While I don't disagree with you in theory, TalkClassical has a membership that ranges from people who have professional status in music to those who may not 'read a note' but care passionately about the music and such discussions of style, form, content, etc.,
> 
> I would also add that TalkClassical is frequently by a membership who sometimes have lives beyond the confines of TalkClassical... or the internet as a whole. I would assume that it is quite possible that many post a comments and then don't check back until much later in the day... or even at a later date. To expect two members to go to it in debate with time limitations while a group of others sit by in judgment is not realistic.


Which is precisely why I didn't suggest that. Maybe you might like to try the act of 'listening more' which I also suggested.  I mean, really, do you think I also seriously thought a claxon should be implemented on the forum?

I think I might shoot myself tonight.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Thanks for your reply! And I am very encouraged, though I wouldn't want the highly trained musicians of the site to feel straight-jacketed from sharing their insights, especially if they spend a little extra time to express their expertise in 'lay terms' whenever possible - and sometimes, it's just not possible, but if it's done w/o a 'Kapellmeister's' voice, I don't think anyone minds - I don't. 
So, lead on 

The site seems to be in a transitional stage (my view as a new member) - just as I arrived some very long time members exited either permanently or for a needed hiatus. Taapkara (sp) initiated a discussion as to whether the members thought TC was loosing its edge and I think there were a number of people who felt this to be the case. All I can say is that in the short time I've been here I've benefited greatly. I have not been treated rudely - though I thought my all out 'Jessye Worship' thread in OPERA should have gotten more attention (pouts, bottom lip firmly jutting out) LOL



Polednice said:


> The "intimate but intimidating" part was just part of the jokey section of my post - of course I want TC to retain it's (usually) relaxed atmosphere!  My main gripe is that we all just tend to shout over each other a lot, and it can get very frustrating. Some might prefer that sense of chaos, but I like things orderly! And if we actually want to educate each other - whether it's on music or something more contentious - then I think we all need to slow down a little and listen more often.
> 
> As perhaps suggested by your post as well, I think it's too common here that the valid intuitions of the non-educated are dismissed or ignored by those who can flaunt a bit of music theory, Latin labels, or quote the odd philosopher. I think "down to earth" is the term that I'd like to describe TC as, but which I don't think it is at the moment.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

@ Polednice -

I know what you are getting at. It is good to be clear and concise, a skill which I am working on now.

Of course it depends on what type of question is being asked. If it's a closed question, eg. with a specific answer, then the answers should indeed be specific. But if it's a broad or open question, then there is room for more variety of views and arguments, some which can be left field or idiosyncratic.

So if questions are of a certain type, it makes sense for us to tailor our answers to that type.

I also agree about many of us, incl. myself probably the most, exposing our world view or ideology in much of what we put down on this forum. It can't be avoided. I sometimes qualify what I'm saying like with "imo" or even question the limitations what I'm saying for this reason. So that's where I sometimes get long-winded, I don't want it to appear that what I'm saying is the be all and end all of the debate/discussion at hand. But then again, sometimes I just rant :lol:, but I'm trying to avoid that now...


----------

