This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
DD (Daily Debate) 60 - Batman vs Iron man
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Ksero
No, I don't believe it is selfish. You really think people have that much love? Have you seen the divorce rates? I think you are confusing lust with love. Love is a dying trait.
Keeping with my theory, divorces happen when you overfill each other with love and break the each other, but if you were outsourcing/sharing it everything would be fine. It is like filling balloon with water, it can take a lot bot at some point it is goign yo pop. (or there was no love to begin with)
I Lul'd. Divorces don't happen because of too much love. They happen because of a lack of it. I don't feel theres anymore I can contribute to the subject; so I'll just quit now.
Why did you lul? this happen's many times, how many couples have an amazing 1-2 years then burn out, they loved each other but just went too fast, too much love is just as bad as not enough. don't try and tell me you can go on lust for 2 years.
Also, Why can't someone have more than one soulmate.
Post by
FatalHeaven
No, I don't believe it is selfish. You really think people have that much love? Have you seen the divorce rates? I think you are confusing lust with love. Love is a dying trait.
Keeping with my theory, divorces happen when you overfill each other with love and break the each other, but if you were outsourcing/sharing it everything would be fine. It is like filling balloon with water, it can take a lot bot at some point it is goign yo pop. (or there was no love to begin with)
I Lul'd. Divorces don't happen because of too much love. They happen because of a lack of it.
Why did you lul? this happen's many times, how many couples have an amazing 1-2 years then burn out, they loved each other but just went too fast, too much love is just as bad as not enough. don't try and tell me you can go on lust for 2 years.
Also, Why can't someone have more than one soulmate.
Nope. Done. Can't argue this more. If I did I'd just be repeating myself/banging my head against a wall. Just going to have to agree to disagree.
Post by
gnomerdon
monogamy.
when i think about my high school sweet heart, i wouldive given her everything. too bad i was a dork back then.
Post by
gamerunknown
I think polygamy can be exploitative in a patriarchal culture where women have fewer rights (Saudi Arabia for instance). Given equal standing in society and right to veto the second marriage contract or predicate a valid marriage on being the only participant, I'd be slightly suspicious, but wouldn't support making polygamy illegal.
Post by
Squishalot
I think polygamy can be exploitative in a patriarchal culture where women have fewer rights (Saudi Arabia for instance). Given equal standing in society and right to veto the second marriage contract or predicate a valid marriage on being the only participant, I'd be slightly suspicious, but wouldn't support making polygamy illegal.
Who's to say that polygamy implies multiple female partners?
One female and multiple male partners is a perfectly reasonable alternative option, or even, multiple female and multiple male partners. One could imagine the latter of that in the sense of having two couples who are 'married' to each other and are comfortable with relations cross-couple.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
OverZealous
It's not a sport in the classical sense, but I definitely do think it's a sport. The Korean scene is the best example: mega-corporations like Coca-Cola and LG sponsor their own teams, and there are tournaments with prize money in the 6-digits. Riot Games is preparing to launch some kind of league where
2 million dollars
(I do think that's the correct number, I'm sure it was over a million though) is up for grabs. With prize money like that, I think it's fair to re-assess competetive gaming.
At least in the Starcraft scene, which I am the most familiar with, there are team-houses where players live and practice together, paid coaches and everything that comes with an "ordinary" sport. Sponsorships are handed out to individual players if a certain company feels they have potential - very reminiscent of sponsor deals in other so-called legit sports.
The question that has to be answered is if "Sports" requires physical effort. In that case, no, e-Sport is not a sport. If not, I fail to see where the significant differences, in general, are.
And this is coming from someone who practices a %^&*-ton of a physical sport.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
OverZealous
Yes they are a legitimate sport.
They are certainly a physical activity, They have intense training schedules and like many athletes there is a prime age range after which you usually can no longer compete with younger participants.
Overzealous, and indeed anyone who says it is not physical watch this
APM Demo
.
I certainly think if you can call bowling a sport, then a constant APM rate of a conservative 200-300 actions per minute sustained over the course of a game has to count. Not the mention the mental effort required, That has to be up there with most sports.
I watch Korean Starcraft daily (particularly Taeja) - I know all about APM. What I mean by "physical" is the requirement to physically practice and eat the right food and all that comes with sports like swimming or cycling is not there in e-Sports. Sure, the Korean e-Sports Association demanded that all of its (Starcraft) players worked out regularly to be in top physical shape, as well. Most Starcraft 2 players (certainly not LoL or Dota, where the pro-scene isn't as developed) do not do this. But I digress; the physical aspect of e-Sports is not as prominent as in most other sports, which is why people are reluctant, I think, to call it a legit sport.
I do not dispute the physical effort required to maintain 200+ EAPM (with peaks around 500 for many Korean pros, though some reach 6-700) for a game that often stretches beyond 30 minutes, but the effort required is not comparable to a game of boxing or a 200m sprint; it just isn't.
I almost feel offended by someone thinking I do not appreciate the physical aspect of e-Sports, haha. Please don't think I don't, I just don't think it's quite comparable to
most
sports
Post by
EdantheDwarf
Yes, it is a sport. Other people have already said better then I could why, so I will not say extra words.
Post by
Adamsm
I see E-sports the same way as Chess, Checkers and other board game championships; if all of those count as sports, why wouldn't electronic versions?
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
Sport – A physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively, sports can be played on land, in water and in the air.
See, I wouldn't argue that Starcraft is a physical activity. The activity (i.e. the movement of units) is virtual. The physical activity of hitting the keys isn't the sport, otherwise, you could argue that
playing piano
is a sport (it's certainly equally as physical as playing Starcraft - definitely more APM in a Rach Concerto than in the average Korean SC game). To me though, that just means your definition of 'sport' is invalid though.
I completely agree with OZ that the Starcraft players are not in peak physical shape. Looked at MC recently? However, I also agree that it's a 'sport' in the sense that it's an activity where players are going head-to-head in competition, and it's bearing the characteristics of a 'legitimate sport' in the sponsorship, tournament and training regime sense. That said, I'm loathe to consider poker a true 'sport', and in the same way, I'm reserved about my thoughts on whether e-sports are a true 'sport'.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
You have a point with the pianist, I suppose it is assumed that any sport must have some scoring system, even if it is not competitive. Giving a concert does not.
Would you say that
this
is a sporting competition? It's subjective scoring, but certainly no more subjective than diving or gymnastics.
I would argue that Starcraft is more sport-like on the basis that even though piano also involves physical and mental dexterity, there is an element of unknown, the opposition player, involved. But then, you might argue, how does diving subsequently qualify as a sport? Or shooting?
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
The bow isn't meant to be used competitively - it's not meant to be 'played' at all. If we look at the old-school Olympics generally, most of the 'sports' were actually military exercises and were done to show off a soldier's prowess and strength. Sprints, weight lifting, wrestling, archery, javelin, etc.. This is unlike the modern day Olympics, with football, netball, and other sports that were clearly designed to be activities for competitive fun, which SC most definitely is.
I'm just not sure that whether an activity has stemmed from other sports is a deciding factor in a determination of whether it itself is a sport. It links back to the 'what events shouldn't be in the Olympics' DotD, somewhat.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.