You’re not allowed to talk about bad faith in a debate forum? I don’t understand. How could that do anything besides shield the sealions, JAQoffs, and grifters?
And please don’t tell me it’s about “civility”. Bad faith is the civil accusation when the alternative is your debate partner is a fool.
To be fair for a gish gallop style of bad faith argument the way religious people like to use LLMs are probably a good match. If all you want is a high number of arguments it is probably easy to produce those with an LLM. Not to mention that most of their arguments have been repeated countless times anyway so the training data probably has them in large numbers. It is not as if they ever cared if their arguments were any good anyway.
I agree and recognized that. I’m more emotionally upset about it tbh. The debates aren’t for the debaters, it’s to hopefully disillusion and remove indoctrinated fears from those on the fence willing to read them. It’s oft repeated there when people ask “what’s the point, same stupid debate for centuries.” Well religions unfortunately persist, and haven’t lost any ground globally. Gained, actually. Not our fault they have no new ideas.
You’re not allowed to talk about bad faith in a debate forum? I don’t understand. How could that do anything besides shield the sealions, JAQoffs, and grifters?
And please don’t tell me it’s about “civility”. Bad faith is the civil accusation when the alternative is your debate partner is a fool.
I won’t tell you.about civiity because
Not shield, but amplify.
That’s the point of the subreddit. I’m not defending them if that’s at all how I came across.
ChatGPT debate threads are plaguing /r/debateanatheist too. Mods are silent on the users asking to ban this disgusting behavior.
I didn’t think it’d be a problem so quickly, but the chuds and theists latched onto ChatGPT instantly for use in debate forums.
To be fair for a gish gallop style of bad faith argument the way religious people like to use LLMs are probably a good match. If all you want is a high number of arguments it is probably easy to produce those with an LLM. Not to mention that most of their arguments have been repeated countless times anyway so the training data probably has them in large numbers. It is not as if they ever cared if their arguments were any good anyway.
I agree and recognized that. I’m more emotionally upset about it tbh. The debates aren’t for the debaters, it’s to hopefully disillusion and remove indoctrinated fears from those on the fence willing to read them. It’s oft repeated there when people ask “what’s the point, same stupid debate for centuries.” Well religions unfortunately persist, and haven’t lost any ground globally. Gained, actually. Not our fault they have no new ideas.
Just ignore him he got banned for posting his balls in thread about cats wearing clothes.