|
Hi Tom
I am forwarding an email I sent to Anton Batey ,
urging him to follow traditional debate format at your next debate. I
thought you killed McAdams in the first debate , but "the professer" wouldnt
shut up when it was your turn to answer , and he consitantly left the
topic at hand to obfuscate and nueter any response by yourself. In short
McAdams threw out so much jibberish as he could , to turn away from the
topic at hand , as I think he realized he was outmatched.
I urged Batey to police the timeline and follow
the topic at hand in your next debate.
I would also encourage you to do the same in your
next debate when McAdams turns to his only weapon , that is to confuse
and spin.
In short , hold him to a timline and keep him on
the subject at hand. I realize that is really the moderator of the
debates job.
I would say good luck but know you wont need luck
with your well researched facts.
Do you think McAdams realizes he is overmatched and
will not show up for the next debate ? Please let me know if he shows up
and where to listen to it ....
Thank you for your time ( hope I spelled your last
name correctly ?)
Michael Flower
Letter sent to Anton below :
--- On Thu, 2/25/10, Michael & Michelle Flower <parksideimaging@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
From: Michael & Michelle Flower <parksideimaging@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: McAdams Rossley debate
To: Anton_Batey@yahoo.com
Date: Thursday, February 25, 2010, 6:12 AM
|
Hi Anton
Enjoyed the McAdams vs. T Rossley debate
on the JFK assassination. I was looking forward to the next one
, but havent seen it posted ? Do you know if there is going to
be another debate between these two and if so , where on the
internet can I find it ?
Also , I realize that both parties are
pretty animated and engrossed in their subjects , but it seemed
to me that ONE of the parties seemed to get off subject , and
seemed to ramble a bit as far as the subject matter in the first
debate. That is to say ONE of the parties seemed to "leave" the
topic or question at hand , and ALSO did not yield the floor and
keep quiet while the other party responded.
In short , to me , it seemed ONE of the
debators did not follow typical debate format , that is STICK TO
THE QUESTION AT HAND , ANSWER IT , THEN KEEP QUIET WHILE THE
OTHER PARTY RESPONDS IN FULL. At the last part of the first
debate , it seemed that ONE of the parties rambled on and on ,
to the extent that both forgot what the original question was ?
It almost seemed to me that ONE of the parties seemed to try and
dominate the timeline of the discussion , and throw out as much
information as possible to obfuscate the other debators point ,
and then leave the question at hand , as far as answering the
topics one by one . Both are very passionate about their own
take.
So as the forum debate moderator , even
though I realize it was very hard to police these two , as both
seem to think their own take is the only answer.
I emphasize with your own task , however
, if there is another debate , "please hold both to traditional
debate format" . I realize that can be tough with these two ,
but it seemed to me that in their last debate , ONE did not keep
quiet enough to let the other party answer , and seemed to get
off subject. Again knowing both parties and listening to other
debates with them , I understand that holding them to task can
be a chore.
I realize that may be tough row to hoe ;
maybe hold them to a timeline to answer , and then cut their
mikes to ensure the other party gets fair and equal time to
answer your questions ? Just a suggestion ....
Thank you for your time and appreciate your
forum.
Michael Flower
Corpus Christi TX |
|
