Past Editorial Notes and Tasks
- August 20th: The most recent debate digest article has a number of arguments that need further development: Mandatory calorie counts infringe restaurants' freedom of speech, and Diners want blissful ignorance without calorie counts. These and some other arguments are widely made, but Debatepedia's article does not yet document many quotations supporting these arguments. You can look for and document these quotations.
- August 19th: User:Renergy could use some help with Space-based solar power. It's a pretty pressing idea. Just read this recent article: "Will Space-Based Solar Power Finally See the Light of Day?" Scientific American. April 16, 2009
- August 14th: The Debatepedia community is now working on Mandatory calorie counts on menus, the next Debate Digest article.
- August 13th: Community is working on the next Debate Digest article Civil unions vs. gay marriage. After that, we'll be working on Mandatory calorie counts on menus.
- July 24th: Debatepedia's community is launching a two-week initiative in the space category.
- July 21st: Linking articles to other, similar articles in "see also" sections - like on Wikipedia - is a major and important task that could use some assistance.
- July 18th: Next Debate Digest article: Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods.
- July 14th: Community is working on Debate: Filibuster for the Debate Digest. Jump in!
- July 13th: Created Does "empathy" have a place in the judiciary?
- June 29th: The latest Debate Digest article - Debate: Election of judges - does not have enough pro arguments, quotations, and pro articles from which to draw quotes. A good way to jump in here is by searching for "pro arguments in favor of electing judges", and then by drawing arguments and quotations from articles and editorials you find.
- June 25th: Debate: Term limits for Supreme Court justices was just created, and is an interesting and important debate topic that we've posted fairly high on the Debate Digest list of debates to work on in the near future, if anyone is interested in getting a jump start in building it out.(Debate Digest cue).
- June 24th: Community is working on the Debate Digest article for the 25th, Debate: Election of judges. New editors are welcome to join in the editing process.
- June 18th: Alibreland outlined the following argument against Executive pay caps, which helps demonstrate the structure of a good argument on Debatepedia: "Executive-pay caps disrupt the free market. This may be an obvious argument but it still holds merit nonetheless. The fact of the matter is that any sort of executive-pay cap would require governmental enforcement, and while government intervention is necessary from time to time, corporations must still be free to conduct business how they feel appropriate. The reason that business and economies thrive is because they are free to make decisions. These decisions allow for a sort of economic survival of the fittest where the best companies stay afloat, and the worst fail. This cannot happen with government intervention, even in the form of pay caps. It's not the government's job to deal with this, because as Henry David Thoreau once famously said, "That government is best which governs least."
- June 17th: The community is currently working on Debate: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, preparing it to become the next Debate Digest article. We could use more pro and con resources to draw quotes and arguments from, if anyone is interested in taking up this task. You can email brooks [at] debatepedia [dot] org for instructions.
- June 14th: Debate: Executive-pay caps is a new article with no content, but which is very important currently. Feel free to jump in.
- June 11th: Debate: Ban on cage fighting was created on June 11th. This should be a really interesting article, and is set to be a Debate Digest article in the next couple of weeks, if anyone is interested in kicking it off with an expanded background section and a couple of arguments.
- June 10th: One of the things we need to start doing is linking similar articles with one-another. The categorization effort underway currently will help hugely with this. The task is to create a "see also" section at the bottom of each debate article, that link to pro/con articles on related topics. We can use the new categories to much more easily find these similar articles and link them up.
- June 9th: Created Debate: "Pay-as-you-go" rules for US federal spending, as the Obama administration proposed the rules to regulate and check federal spending. The rules require that all increases in federal spending are matched by equal cuts in spending elsewhere. There is no content yet in this article, aside from a brief introduction. Feel free to write an argument or two. Debate: Scientology as a state-recognized religion is also an interesting one you might want to jump-in on.
- June 7th: Working on categorizing all articles. Debatepedia Founder Brooks Lindsay is moving from A to Z through all articles. You can help by moving from Z to A, going into each article and writing the 10 or so categories an article fits into, by writing, for example, [[Category:Politics]], [[Category:History]], or [[Category:War]] and so forth at the very bottom of articles. Refer to the recent Debate Digest article, Debate: Corporal punishment of children, as a model.
- June 3rd: A list of nearly empty or under-developed articles that are coming up for the Debate Digest in June. Feel free to take charge of and develop these articles:
- Debate: Gene patents
- Debate: Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods
- Debate: Should lobbyists disclose names of officials they meet?
- Debate: Mandatory counseling of women seeking abortions
- Debate: Partial-birth abortion (a total mess, needs to be cleaned up).
- Debate: Presidential pardons in the United States
- Debate: Human life as beginning at conception
- Debate: Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
- Debate: Should lobbyists disclose names of officials they meet?
- Debate: Non-interventionism
- May 27th: Very excited to see editors communicating with each other organically. Wredling has been doing a particularly good job of encouraging other editors to "keep going". Great stuff!
- May 25th: Winterstl made a really interesting argument on Debate: Abolition of nuclear weapons on May 25th: "Nuclear weapons may protect humans from threats from space. Nuclear weapons could protect the human race, all other living species on the planet, and the planet itself should it come under threat of alien invasion, a massive asteroid, and so forth if they happen to be the only suitable defense available at the time. This suggests that keeping at least a 'sufficient amount' of such weapons would be beneficial for survival."
- Telos made particularly exceptional and well structured arguments on Debate: Prostitution on May 20th.
- "Prostitutes/clients are no more victims than workers/consumers. There are many dangers related to all kinds of legal professions. A person working in a factory risks dismemberment, chemical burns, and in some cases even death. A consumer of any product similarly risks injury due to defective parts or shoddy construction. In everything we do we are choosing a level of risk that is acceptable. The risk of a client catching an STD is known, and the client is willing to take that risk. To use that as a basis for victimization would be silly when you could catch e-coli from a bag of spinach."