本文介绍了一种新的辩论格式的测试，寻求志愿者参与对多个话题的辩论，包括政策决策、地区问题等。作者认为好的辩论应基于对真相的适度关注及开放礼貌的态度。该辩论格式通过一系列步骤进行，且不设判定胜负机制，还提到了一些可能的额外尝试。

🎤新辩论格式正在测试，通过视频通话进行，结束后会发布在作者的YouTube及其他平台上。

💬作者认为多数辩论质量不佳，好的辩论应从对真相有一定关注且态度开放礼貌的人开始。

📋新辩论格式包括对辩论者进行民意调查，找出他们的共识与分歧，介绍辩论者及共识，针对具体分歧展开讨论，每位辩论者有特定的发言和提问时间，主持人维护发言秩序，有时会在共享白板上记录关键要点等步骤，且不判定胜负。

✨作者还提到了一些可能后续尝试的额外内容，如Katja Grace的协助、在Manifold上设置相关市场的赌注、基于LLM的实时事实核查、向观众进行事实核查等。

Published on October 10, 2024 9:32 AM GMT

I am testing a new debate format and am looking for people to debate any of the following (or make a case for other things):

Policy decisionsEA Cause prioritisationWhat should/will happen in Taiwan/Ukraine/GazaUS electionsEconomicsAnimal consciousness

The debate would happen via a video call and then be put on my youtube (and I guess other places if you want). 

Why am I asking for volunteers?

Most debates are bad, at least in part because the people who have them just want to win. Go on youtube and you can find 10s of debates with bad faith arguments and a descent into insults. These debates are usually about either US politics, trans issues or religion. 

I think a debate will go much better if it starts with a pair of people who both have some moderate care for the truth and have reputation locked into being open and polite. The work of having good discussions is hard enough, without making it harder.

What is the format?

I am testing a new format, which I ran at Manifest (and which many seemed to enjoy^[1]):

Poll the two people debatingFind things they agree and disagree onIntroduce the debaters and the things they agree onTake a specific area they disagree onEach debater gets [2 x 5] minutes where they are in control. They can speak or ask questionsAs the moderator, I uphold their boundaries during this time - they can't be interrupted.Sometimes I will write key cruxes on a shared whiteboardAfter the time is up for that topic, we move onto another specific disagreementThere is no mechanism to figure out who has "won"

Optiona additions I might try later.

@Katja Grace might sometimes help and try and disentangle cruxes. I am interested in having active moderation^[2]Give both candidates M10,000 on manifold and require that they bet it during the debate on markets relating to the debate which I will createSome kind of live LLM based fact checkingSome kind of "throw to the audience" fact checking if I do a livestream

So do you have a view on these topics and want to discuss it?

The format aims to be relaxed and not require you to manage your own boundaries. If I do my job well, you don't have to worry about someone being rude, taking more time than allotted or shifting the question around. I hope this might allow participants more space to focus on the discussion.

1. ^{^}

   Including @Eliezer Yudkowsky who asked if I could run one with him. He seems pretty hard to please.

2. ^{^}

   I don't intuitively think I'd be very good at this. I think Katja would probably be very good.

Discuss