WI Guidelines & Time Expansion-PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33940
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Europe

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Marcus » 11 Mar 2008 12:30

Troy Tempest wrote:Why has 1988 been selected for the cut-off point in history to discuss what-ifs? Is there a reason that Desert Storm is verboten?


The limit is simply this year minus 20 years.

/Marcus

User avatar
Troy Tempest
Member
Posts: 394
Joined: 14 Nov 2006 10:17
Location: Port Macquarie, NSW, Australia

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Troy Tempest » 11 Mar 2008 12:42

Okay, thanks Marcus

User avatar
Roddoss72
Member
Posts: 1367
Joined: 21 Jul 2005 05:44
Location: Australia

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Roddoss72 » 12 May 2008 02:58

Salutations All

Can someone please explain to me what a "Strawman" is.

Regards

Roddoss72

Jon G.
Member
Posts: 6647
Joined: 17 Feb 2004 01:12
Location: Europe

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Jon G. » 12 May 2008 03:04

You commit the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your opponent, one that the opponent wouldn't endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily refuted position believing you have undermined the opponent's actual position. If the misrepresentation is on purpose, then the straw man fallacy is caused by lying.


From Fallacies, a highly useful web page.

User avatar
Roddoss72
Member
Posts: 1367
Joined: 21 Jul 2005 05:44
Location: Australia

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Roddoss72 » 12 May 2008 03:16

Jon G. wrote:
You commit the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your opponent, one that the opponent wouldn't endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily refuted position believing you have undermined the opponent's actual position. If the misrepresentation is on purpose, then the straw man fallacy is caused by lying.


From Fallacies, a highly useful web page.


Salutations Jon G.

So if i have authored a post with a set of circumstances and someone comes onto that senario and begins to misquote what my senario has indicated, is that a "Straw Man", my understanding of debating hypothetical senarios is that one has to work in the confines of the original question. Any contribution from other relating to real world facts that have been not been endorsed by me as the original author of the question, are they considered "Straw Man". Or are a few select folk allowed to do what ever they please.

Regards

Roddoss72

Okyzm
Banned
Posts: 602
Joined: 24 Mar 2008 04:14
Location: Wrocław, Poland

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Okyzm » 31 May 2010 21:05

There will be no thread’s concerning WI Germany had won WW2 how would the world be different etc. Again they are to shallow and the complex nature and dynamics of such a thread would make it unworkable in reaching a feasible conclusion
Is this restriction in regards to general question, or are threads regarding possible realization of certain Nazi goals allowed ?

User avatar
LWD
Member
Posts: 8584
Joined: 21 Sep 2005 21:46
Location: Michigan

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by LWD » 01 Jun 2010 12:12

Roddoss72 wrote:
Jon G. wrote:
You commit the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your opponent, one that the opponent wouldn't endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily refuted position believing you have undermined the opponent's actual position. If the misrepresentation is on purpose, then the straw man fallacy is caused by lying.
From Fallacies, a highly useful web page.
Salutations Jon G.

So if i have authored a post with a set of circumstances and someone comes onto that senario and begins to misquote what my senario has indicated, is that a "Straw Man",
It could be or not. Was the misquote due to a misunderatanding or lack of clarity? If so then it's not a strawman. Is the misquote a easily refutable postition? If not no strawman.
my understanding of debating hypothetical senarios is that one has to work in the confines of the original question. Any contribution from other relating to real world facts that have been not been endorsed by me as the original author of the question, are they considered "Straw Man". Or are a few select folk allowed to do what ever they please....
No. I'm not exactly sure what you are asking here but in general the answer is no. It might be off topic if they change something you've written about the POD but even there if the POD isn't a reasonable one an argument could be made for allowing it.

User avatar
Andy H
Forum Staff
Posts: 14985
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:51
Location: UK and USA

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Andy H » 12 Jun 2010 22:07

Okyzm wrote:
There will be no thread’s concerning WI Germany had won WW2 how would the world be different etc. Again they are to shallow and the complex nature and dynamics of such a thread would make it unworkable in reaching a feasible conclusion
Is this restriction in regards to general question, or are threads regarding possible realization of certain Nazi goals allowed ?
Hi

The restriction is one threads which have a basic premise that Germany won WW2 (whatever that truely means) and then we are asked to speculate as to what happens from that point on. As stated that line is to broad and shallow to achive any meaningful conclusion. Obviously you can begin threads on more specific campaigns & strategic issues that may well have lead to a German victory but not beyond that.

Regards

Andy H

Okyzm
Banned
Posts: 602
Joined: 24 Mar 2008 04:14
Location: Wrocław, Poland

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Okyzm » 12 Jun 2010 22:12

Obviously you can begin threads on more specific campaigns & strategic issues that may well have lead to a German victory but not beyond that.
So I understand that I can post what-ifs on specific genocidal operations conducted by Germans in WW2?

User avatar
Baltasar
Financial supporter
Posts: 4610
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 15:56
Location: Germany

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Baltasar » 13 Jun 2010 19:59

Since you already have a very specific opinion about such events and surprisingly are only ever interested in such acts when they are commited by Nazi German forces, there's not much to be gained from such threads apart from polarizing members of the forum, getting threads closed and stirring up unrest up to a level of flamewar.

Okyzm
Banned
Posts: 602
Joined: 24 Mar 2008 04:14
Location: Wrocław, Poland

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Okyzm » 13 Jun 2010 23:19

Since you already have a very specific opinion about such events and surprisingly are only ever interested in such acts when they are commited by Nazi German forces,
Why surprisingly? Being a member of "untermenschen" I am quite interested in German actions that could have resulted in extermination of my nation and other similiar victims. I studied them for a long time, and of course everybody has certain special interests. As to the rest-I would rather welcome an moderator answer.
there's not much to be gained from such threads apart from polarizing members of the forum
I see no reason for this to happen. If they are any deniers of Holocaust,Generalplan Ost, and other atrocities connected to Germany in WW2 then they won't serious members of this site.

User avatar
Baltasar
Financial supporter
Posts: 4610
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 15:56
Location: Germany

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Baltasar » 13 Jun 2010 23:59

Yet again, you chose not to adress the main concern of my post: You already have your opinion, so there is no point in starting a what if thread if you already are not open to other opinions. But since threads with your "participation" seem to be generally short lived for some reason or the other, that will probably not be too much of anybodys concern anyway.

User avatar
Baltasar
Financial supporter
Posts: 4610
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 15:56
Location: Germany

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion - please read carefully

Post by Baltasar » 14 Jun 2010 00:00

Marcus Wendel wrote:
Troy Tempest wrote:Why has 1988 been selected for the cut-off point in history to discuss what-ifs? Is there a reason that Desert Storm is verboten?
The limit is simply this year minus 20 years.

/Marcus

Marcus, is this a general rule of the thumb? Could we for example discuss what could have happened if the political cadre and army of the GDR had opted to open fire upon demonstrations in 1989?

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33940
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Europe

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion-PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

Post by Marcus » 19 Jun 2010 17:44

I'm not sure how I can make it any clearer, the limit is today minus 20 years. For further details on what types of threads are allowed, see the first post in this thread.

/Marcus

nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010 06:39
Location: Philippines

Re: WI Guidelines & Time Expansion-PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 22 Aug 2010 00:03

Hello Marcus Wendel...Okay...I just follow the rules and I'm sorry. Thanks

Return to “What if”