The Unofficial GT Rules

[Dondi]

It took me a little while to figure out this forum but I think I've finally got it sorted. Having read through countless threads in GT I've recognised the following unofficial rules. Perhaps we could make this a sticky so newcomers know how to play

Do you have scripture to back these up????

THE UNOFFICIAL GT RULES​

1. There are 2 teams: Catholics and Protestants. All players are to affiliate themselves with one of these teams before play commences.
1A - Orthodox Church members are to be treated as Catholics with beards, except in threads pertaining to the authority of Rome and/or the Pope (or on doctrnial matters post schism) in which case they are to assume the anti-Catholic position.
1B - To keep the forum from becoming too predictable, the occassional exhibition game will be played between Sabbitarians and the rest of the church.​

Strawman. The real division is between the Predestinationalists and the Free Will Advocates.

2.

The object of the game: is to establish that the other team is wrong. This may prove difficult at times especially when both teams are saying the same thing in different ways. This is where strategy becomes so important.

I agree to disagree on this point. The object is to prove myself right.​

3.

Winning strategies:
* Establish the oppositions perspective for them. This is of upmost importance if one is to gain the upper hand. Distortion and exaggeration are the key here. Try to find ambiguious quotes from the other sides great players from the past and use them out of context to establish that the other side really believe something other than what they are professing to believe. Getting this part right can make or break the game.

Can you clear this point up?

*

Avoid arguing against the points the opposition raises. This will only distract from the position you've established already. Rather you should always endeavour to reestablish the other teams faulty perspective as outlined above and argue against it. This style can be referred to as: "What I think about what I think you think."

Thats what you think. I'm glad you are such an authority on the matter.

*

Skilled players are able to fool the opposition into defending aspects of the faulty position that was presented for them. This helps reinforce acceptance of the distorted perspective and ensures the truth of the matter will not be discussed, further ensuring that players won't find themselves in the unfortunate position of having to argue against a position they actually agree with.

I think I agree with you on this. Or not.

* Less skilled players need not worry. There are still plenty of strategies that will work effectively for the novice. Perhaps the most effective is the "cut and paste" method, whereby a player is to ignore all information presented to them and simply restate their position over and over again. This will infuriate and try the patience of even the most skilled opposition player and will eventually empty the thread, leaving the novice with a win through attrition.

Thats what you think. I'm glad you are such an authority on the matter.​

4. Scoring:

There are several ways to score but the most effective methods are the "slam dunk distortion", "disassembly", "strawman" and "team doubles".

You are using terms that are not biblical.

*

A Slam Dunk Distortion is when a player is able to use the oppositions own words to reaffirm the faulty perspective they were given initially. A Super Slam Dunk is when the opposition is led into a trap of loosely outlining the faulty perspective first and then the player uses those words and adds the twisted quotes and the appropriate rebuttal all at once. This is worth double points.

For your information, "outlining the faulty perspective first and then the player uses those words and adds the twisted rebuttal all at once" is not a "trap", but a effective hermanetic device designed to lead back to the truth of scripture as I see it.

*

Disassembly is when a player takes the oppositions post

I'm not in that habit of using a persons post against them, but I let their folly speak for themselves.

and pulls it apart point by point.

But that's only if they have a legitmate point to begin with.

The more things they can object to, the more points they get.

I object to your insinuation that I'm trying to gain points

*

Strawman is the act of recognising a loosely supported argument by the opposition an proclaiming "Strawman" in the rebuttal. A strong strawman call is worth a lot of points.

I think your being sexist. Why can't there be a Strawwomen?

*

Team Doubles are when a player quotes a fellow team members post that has already scored and adds an "Amen" or a clapping icon to it. This allows the original post to score again.

I think this is a cheap shot at one's use of smiley's. These icons are for encouragement and expression. Right folks?

​

5. Winning the game:

The game is only over when everyone stops playing. It's still unclear how the eventual winner is decided, but there are many who believe they can avoid losing by expressing a premature intent to leave and highlighting it with a parting blow. If it's already been established that they will not be around for any contention of their parting words, they have avoided outright defeat. Alternately there are other players who believe winning is only attained by having the final say altogether. This can cause some confusion as there is no official time limit between posts, so a late charge may go uncontested by a player who has already claimed victory.

Mods, Please close this thread....Now!​

 

[Splayd]

OOOOCH!
A HUGE scoring post by Dondi. We just better hope noone goes for a Team Double on that one

 

[CaDan]

Hey!

These rules need something about Anglicans--notorious spoilers, those Anglicans.

Especially when they start acting all polite.

 

[Tonks]

Hey!

These rules need something about Anglicans--notorious spoilers, those Anglicans.

Especially when they start acting all polite.

What is next? The Lutherans with their tuna casserole and green jello? *shudder*

 

[ScottBot]

Hey!

These rules need something about Anglicans--notorious spoilers, those Anglicans.

Especially when they start acting all polite.

Well, the Anglicans are a mixed bag. Some come down on the side of the Apostolic Traditionalists, some come down on the Reformationists. Some come down on both sides of the arguement at the same time, some put up a new and completely independent position.

 

[winsome]

Well, the Anglicans are a mixed bag. Some come down on the side of the Apostolic Traditionalists, some come down on the Reformationists. Some come down on both sides of the arguement at the same time, some put up a new and completely independent position.

Amen

 

[JJB]

Care to share? I'm sure that the Inquisitor General will be harsh, but fair.

LOL Tonks!

I thought the underlying rules of CF are the same as Rodney King's lament: "Can't we all just get along?"

 

[CaDan]

Well, the Anglicans are a mixed bag. Some come down on the side of the Apostolic Traditionalists, some come down on the Reformationists. Some come down on both sides of the arguement at the same time, some put up a new and completely independent position.

We demand they choose a side or they can't play! This via media nonsense must be stamped out immediately!

 

[ScottBot]

We demand they choose a side or they can't play! This via media nonsense must be stamped out immediately!

They will invariably choose their side, whatever that may be.

 

[Splayd]

We'll have to consider how this affects the Anglicans but I've got to say my initial insinct is that if they can't play by the rules, they shouldn't be allowed to play at all.

Maybe we should ignore their posts altogether, just like the person who posted somewhere between #16 and #18 used to keep getting ignored.

I mean it only seems fair.

 

[winsome]

I agree, Grand Inquisitor has such a nice ring to it.

List of Spanish Grand Inquisitors

• Tomás de Torquemada, prior of Santa Cruz 1483 - 1498
• Diego de Deza Tavera, prior of Santo Domingo 1499 - 1506
• Diego Ramírez de Guzmán, bishop of Catanea y Lugo 1506 - 1507
• Francisco Ximénez de Cisneros, archbishop of Toledo 1507 - 1517
• Juan Enguera, bishop of Lérida y Tortosa 1507 - 1513
• Luis Mercader Escolano, bishop of Tortosa 1513 - 1516
• Adriano de Traiecto (Utrecht) 1516 - 1518
• Adriano de Traiecto (Utrecht) 1518 - 1522
• Alonso Manrique de Lara, archbishop of Sevilla 1523 - 1538
• Juan Pardo de Tavera, archbishop of Toledo 1539 - 1545
• García de Loisa, archbishop of Sevilla 1546
• Fernando de Valdés y Salas 1547 - 1566
• Diego de Espinosa, bishop of Sigüenza and Cuenca 1566 - 1572
• Pedro Ponce de León, bishop of Ciudad Rodrigo and Plasencia 1572
• Gaspar de Quiroga y Sandoval, archbishop of Toledo 1573 - 1594
• Jerónimo Manrique de Lara, bishop of Cartagena y Ávila 1595
• Pedro de Portocarrero, bishop of Calahorra y Cuenca 1596 - 1599
• Hernando Niño de Guevara, archbishop of Philipis and Sevilla 1599 - 1602
• Juan de Zúñiga Flores, bishop of Cartagena 1602
• Juan Bautista de Acevedo, bishop of Valladolid and Patriarch of the Indias 1603 - 1608
• Bernardo de Sandoval y Rojas, archbishop of Toledo 1608 - 1618
• Luis de Aliaga Martínez 1619 - 1621
• Andrés Pacheco, bishop of Cuenca and Patriarch of the Indias 1622 - 1626
• Antonio de Zapata Cisneros y Mendoza, archbishop of Burgos 1627 - 1632
• Antonio de Sotomayor, prior of Santo Domingo 1632 - 1643
• Diego de Arce y Reinoso, bishop of Tuy, Ávila and Plasencia 1643 - 1665
• Pascual de Aragón y Fernández de Córdoba, archbishop of Toledo 1665
• Juan Everardo Nittard 1666 - 1669
• Diego Sarmiento de Valladares, bishop of Oviedo and Plasencia 1669 - 1695
• Juan Tomás de Rocaberti, prior of Santo Domingo and archbishop of Valencia 1695 - 1699
• Alonso Fernández de Córdoba y Aguilar 1699
• Baltasar de Mendoza y Sandoval, bishop of Segovia 1699 - 1705
• Vidal Martín, archbishop of Burgos 1705 - 1709
• Antonio Ibáñez de Riva Herrera, archbishop of Zaragoza and Toledo 1709 - 1710
• Antonio Judice, archbishop of Monreal 1711 - 1717
• José Molines 1717
• Felipe de Arcemendi 1718
• Diego de Astorga y Céspedes, archbishop of Toledo 1720
• Juan de Camargo y Angulo y Pasquer, bishop of Pamplona 1720 - 1733
• Andrés de Prbe y Larreategui, archbishop of Valencia 1733 - 1740
• Manuel Isidro Orozco Manrique de Lara, archbishop of Santiago 1742 - 1745
• Francisco Pérez de Prado y Cuesta,bishop of Teruel 1746 - 1755
• Manuel Quintano Bonifaz, archbishop of Farsalia 1755 - 1774
• Felipe Beltrán, bishop of Salamanca 1775 - 1783
• Agustín Rubin de Ceballos, bishop of Jaén 1784 - 1793
• Manuel Abad y Lasierra, archbishop of Selimbria 1793 - 1794
• Francisco Antonio Lorenzana y Butrón, archbishop of Toledo 1794 - 1797
• Ramón José de Arce y Rebollar, archbishop of Amida, Burgos and Zaragoza 1797 - 1798
• Francisco J.Mier y Campillo, bishop of Almería 1814 - 1818
• Jerónimo Castillón y Salas, bishop of Tarazona 1818 - 1820

How many points do I get?

 

[Splayd]

I'm not sure Winsome, but you're definitely in the running for a jacket.

 

[winsome]

I'm not sure Winsome, but you're definitely in the running for a jacket.

Probably a straight jacket!

 

[The Princess Bride]

Ah, Splayd . . . .

If you followed cycling, you would know that many games can be played at once. Over the course of one of the Grand Tours (Giro d'Italia, Tour de France, Vuelta de' Espana), there are many races within each race. The most familiar is the General Classification--the overall leader, but there are others, including the Points Classification, the King of the Mountains, and the individual stage wins.

So, I present for your consideration some of the games within the game:

"Points Classification" (Green Jersey)--Whoever can make the most unrefuted "points" and refer back to them. Example: "You never responded to my point in post 216 about Calvin's preference for Kung Pao Chicken."

"King of the Mountains" (Polka Dot Jersey)--Whoever can cut and paste the greatest mountain of material into the thread.

"Stage Win" (No Jersey, but a trophy at the end)--Whoever gets the last post in before Staff closes the thread gets the stage win.

"Best Young Poster" (White Jersey)--Any poster with less than 100 posts on CF who can keep up with a thread to the end is entered into this competition.

"General Classification" (Yellow Jersey)--That would be the CF Rep system.
​

ROFL!!!
That is priceless.

The OP cracked me up too!

 

[JimfromOhio]

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Splayd again."

Would some kind members hit Splayd's rep button about one million times, please?

Gave the reps fo ya.

 

[Joykins]

Don't forget, we are playing "shirts" and "skins".

The "shirts" have a faith icon that identifies themselves with the Catholic or Protestant team. The "skins" wear a generic faith icon.

A shirt or skin may play for either side, depending on the game topic.

 

[A New Dawn]

List of Spanish Grand Inquisitors

• Tomás de Torquemada, prior of Santa Cruz 1483 - 1498
• Diego de Deza Tavera, prior of Santo Domingo 1499 - 1506
• Diego Ramírez de Guzmán, bishop of Catanea y Lugo 1506 - 1507
• Francisco Ximénez de Cisneros, archbishop of Toledo 1507 - 1517
• Juan Enguera, bishop of Lérida y Tortosa 1507 - 1513
• Luis Mercader Escolano, bishop of Tortosa 1513 - 1516
• Adriano de Traiecto (Utrecht) 1516 - 1518
• Adriano de Traiecto (Utrecht) 1518 - 1522
• Alonso Manrique de Lara, archbishop of Sevilla 1523 - 1538
• Juan Pardo de Tavera, archbishop of Toledo 1539 - 1545
• García de Loisa, archbishop of Sevilla 1546
• Fernando de Valdés y Salas 1547 - 1566
• Diego de Espinosa, bishop of Sigüenza and Cuenca 1566 - 1572
• Pedro Ponce de León, bishop of Ciudad Rodrigo and Plasencia 1572
• Gaspar de Quiroga y Sandoval, archbishop of Toledo 1573 - 1594
• Jerónimo Manrique de Lara, bishop of Cartagena y Ávila 1595
• Pedro de Portocarrero, bishop of Calahorra y Cuenca 1596 - 1599
• Hernando Niño de Guevara, archbishop of Philipis and Sevilla 1599 - 1602
• Juan de Zúñiga Flores, bishop of Cartagena 1602
• Juan Bautista de Acevedo, bishop of Valladolid and Patriarch of the Indias 1603 - 1608
• Bernardo de Sandoval y Rojas, archbishop of Toledo 1608 - 1618
• Luis de Aliaga Martínez 1619 - 1621
• Andrés Pacheco, bishop of Cuenca and Patriarch of the Indias 1622 - 1626
• Antonio de Zapata Cisneros y Mendoza, archbishop of Burgos 1627 - 1632
• Antonio de Sotomayor, prior of Santo Domingo 1632 - 1643
• Diego de Arce y Reinoso, bishop of Tuy, Ávila and Plasencia 1643 - 1665
• Pascual de Aragón y Fernández de Córdoba, archbishop of Toledo 1665
• Juan Everardo Nittard 1666 - 1669
• Diego Sarmiento de Valladares, bishop of Oviedo and Plasencia 1669 - 1695
• Juan Tomás de Rocaberti, prior of Santo Domingo and archbishop of Valencia 1695 - 1699
• Alonso Fernández de Córdoba y Aguilar 1699
• Baltasar de Mendoza y Sandoval, bishop of Segovia 1699 - 1705
• Vidal Martín, archbishop of Burgos 1705 - 1709
• Antonio Ibáñez de Riva Herrera, archbishop of Zaragoza and Toledo 1709 - 1710
• Antonio Judice, archbishop of Monreal 1711 - 1717
• José Molines 1717
• Felipe de Arcemendi 1718
• Diego de Astorga y Céspedes, archbishop of Toledo 1720
• Juan de Camargo y Angulo y Pasquer, bishop of Pamplona 1720 - 1733
• Andrés de Prbe y Larreategui, archbishop of Valencia 1733 - 1740
• Manuel Isidro Orozco Manrique de Lara, archbishop of Santiago 1742 - 1745
• Francisco Pérez de Prado y Cuesta,bishop of Teruel 1746 - 1755
• Manuel Quintano Bonifaz, archbishop of Farsalia 1755 - 1774
• Felipe Beltrán, bishop of Salamanca 1775 - 1783
• Agustín Rubin de Ceballos, bishop of Jaén 1784 - 1793
• Manuel Abad y Lasierra, archbishop of Selimbria 1793 - 1794
• Francisco Antonio Lorenzana y Butrón, archbishop of Toledo 1794 - 1797
• Ramón José de Arce y Rebollar, archbishop of Amida, Burgos and Zaragoza 1797 - 1798
• Francisco J.Mier y Campillo, bishop of Almería 1814 - 1818
• Jerónimo Castillón y Salas, bishop of Tarazona 1818 - 1820

How many points do I get?

None because you didn't post a link.

 

[JimfromOhio]

I view some debates as competing. When competing... there are rules to follow.

2 Timothy 2:5
Similarly, if anyone competes as an athlete, he does not receive the victor's crown unless he competes according to the rules.

 

[Dondi]

Don't forget, we are playing "shirts" and "skins".

The "shirts" have a faith icon that identifies themselves with the Catholic or Protestant team. The "skins" wear a generic faith icon.

A shirt or skin may play for either side, depending on the game topic.

Naw, it would be more interesting to have a debate about women's authority in the church. Men are "shirts". Women are "skins".

 

[ScottBot]

Naw, it would be more interesting to have a debate about women's authority in the church. Men are "shirts". Women are "skins".

......

Now I feel dirty.