CS Debate Thread

[Aurora Storm]

I think that dogs follow a kind of "order" in regards to their behaviour. Firstly, they're dogs - plain and simple. Then yes, breed comes into it - which is why, like Lupen said, you are less likely to find an aggressive golden retriever than a pitbull. But then you have another level where a dog's nature develops in relation to how it's treated. If you raise a dog to fight/be aggressive, then that is how it will behave.

Most of the time there is absolutely nothing wrong with the animal. It's the owner.

[The Great ME!]

Pitbulls are not the only dog breed used for fighting. Actually, it's common for even Pug's and Pomeramians to be used for dog-fighting, but it's usually overlooked under the media hype that Pitbulls are the only ones used, when that's not true(I think this is only in other countries, but did you know there are major horse-fighting rings as well?)

I will note that Pitbulls were bred not for years but centuries as War dogs(or at least their predecessor breeds were), during more medieval times and even earlier than that when war was a prevelant and common event, as well as many other pit-bull-like and bull-dog-like breeds. Same with Mastiffs. Some are prone to genetically be more aggressive, as is the case with many of the breeds people mentioned before(especially concerning Dobermans), but can be taught out with very careful handling.

Akita were actually bred more as hunting dogs than fighting dogs at first(at least the Japanese variety; there is a different between an American Akita and an Akita Inu, both in size, coloration, and sometimes temperament) but it wasn't unusual for them to be alternatively used for fighting dogs as well, because initially they were bred to hunt bears.

Tosa Ken are still used for fighting in Japan today in some areas as a legal sport, but to my knowledge the criteria for a "Tosa dog fighting ring" is far different from the American illegal gang fighting ring standards.
Dog fighting in American gangs can have a single match last for an hour or more, until one of the dogs is killed or too wounded to fight back or move. Tosa dog fights in Japan have time limits and end immediately when one of the dogs barks, yelps, or cowers out of the fight, or if the owner throws in the towl, or the on-site vet declares an end or that it's too dangerous. I wouldn't call it "humane" or "sofisticated", neccessarily, but they aren't as horribly brutal and actually have set rules and standards to what they'll allow as an official thing. I've seen a lot of the videos of the dogs during or after the fight and often the dogs barely even have scratches on them, and never mauling or any horrible goring like we see here with illegal fighting ring dogs. And really, they're more like sumo wrestling matches than claw-and-tooth fights like with pitbulls and other breeds that are fought.

One such video of presenting the champion dog AFTER the fighting matches finished.

Dog fighting evolved in Kōchi to a form that is called tōken (闘犬?). Under modern rules, dogs fight in a fenced ring until one of the dogs barks, yelps, or loses the will to fight. Owners are allowed to throw in the towel, and matches are stopped if a doctor judges it is too dangerous. Draws usually occur when both dogs will not fight or both dogs fight until the time limit. There are various other rules, including one that specifies that a dog will lose if it attempts to copulate. Champion dogs are called yokozuna, as in sumo. Dog fighting is not banned at a nationwide level, but the prefectures of Tokyo, Kanagawa, Fukui, Ishikawa, Toyama and Hokkaidō all ban the practice.[22] Currently, most fighting dogs in Japan are of the Tosa breed which is native to Kōchi.

The costume she put on the dog afterwards is also basically a ceremonial award for the champion dog to wear, to show he's a champion.

They're listed under the "Dangerous dog breeds" acts as well because they're a mastiff-originated breed. It seems there's sort of a stigma that dog breed with certain histories and physical appearance are "dangerous" by default. Kind of sad really.

[qiripan]

I don't think there's a debate for this but, I think the new "Common Core Standards" for school are ridiculous. I mean, I come home from school with absolutely no knowledge of what I learned. It's so hard. They're trying to make kids learn more, but really, you're just confusing us.

[FuzzyDerp]

I know. We shouldn't had to learn grammar at school. I mean, its ridiculous.
And if school can't help us become independent, and if it just has us sitting at our desks all day except for PE and break time and lunchtime, then there's something wrong.

[*~.Imagination.~*]

I know. We shouldn't had to learn grammar at school. I mean, its ridiculous.
And if school can't help us become independent, and if it just has us sitting at our desks all day except for PE and break time and lunchtime, then there's something wrong.

While I agree with most of this, and that schools (in America at least) are definitely doing something wrong, can you really say that we shouldn't have to learn grammar? It's a basic and fundamental construct that is most definitely important in any language.

[The Great ME!]

I don't think there's a debate for this but, I think the new "Common Core Standards" for school are ridiculous. I mean, I come home from school with absolutely no knowledge of what I learned. It's so hard. They're trying to make kids learn more, but really, you're just confusing us.

They called it "Standards Based Learning" and "Power Standards" at the school I graduated from.
But yeah, it was completely ridiculous. Even the teachers flat-out told their students that they had no idea what they were even supposed to be teaching under the new system. Which is total crap.
It was one of those cases of "This is our new and improved system! It just doesn't work as well as the old one."

I know. We shouldn't had to learn grammar at school. I mean, its ridiculous.

I think you mean "We shouldn't have to learn grammar in school." /shot

No, but seriously, grammar is one of the most important parts of written language. It is in fact very far from ridiculous, because the context of language changes, well, the context! You may not care about proper grammar and think it's ridiculous, but it's in fact very important for proper, clear communication. The grammar you use or very slight differences in punctuation really can make a world of difference and completely change the meaning of what you say.
As is proven by the number of internet melodrama-butthurt-fests I've seen spring up across every site by a simple misunderstanding of miswording or poor grammar/sentence structure...

[Max]

I don't think there's a debate for this but, I think the new "Common Core Standards" for school are ridiculous. I mean, I come home from school with absolutely no knowledge of what I learned. It's so hard. They're trying to make kids learn more, but really, you're just confusing us.

They called it "Standards Based Learning" and "Power Standards" at the school I graduated from.
But yeah, it was completely ridiculous. Even the teachers flat-out told their students that they had no idea what they were even supposed to be teaching under the new system. Which is total crap.
It was one of those cases of "This is our new and improved system! It just doesn't work as well as the old one."

I know. We shouldn't had to learn grammar at school. I mean, its ridiculous.

I think you mean "We shouldn't have to learn grammar in school." /shot

No, but seriously, grammar is one of the most important parts of written language. It is in fact very far from ridiculous, because the context of language changes, well, the context! You may not care about proper grammar and think it's ridiculous, but it's in fact very important for proper, clear communication. The grammar you use or very slight differences in punctuation really can make a world of difference and completely change the meaning of what you say.
As is proven by the number of internet melodrama-butthurt-fests I've seen spring up across every site by a simple misunderstanding of miswording or poor grammar/sentence structure...

I would have to agree. It would be kind of annoying if people walked around: tlking liek dis cuz yknow dey dunt kno grammers. Hard to read, right?

[Aaaron]

I don't think there's a debate for this but, I think the new "Common Core Standards" for school are ridiculous. I mean, I come home from school with absolutely no knowledge of what I learned. It's so hard. They're trying to make kids learn more, but really, you're just confusing us.

They called it "Standards Based Learning" and "Power Standards" at the school I graduated from.
But yeah, it was completely ridiculous. Even the teachers flat-out told their students that they had no idea what they were even supposed to be teaching under the new system. Which is total crap.
It was one of those cases of "This is our new and improved system! It just doesn't work as well as the old one."

I know. We shouldn't had to learn grammar at school. I mean, its ridiculous.

I think you mean "We shouldn't have to learn grammar in school." /shot

No, but seriously, grammar is one of the most important parts of written language. It is in fact very far from ridiculous, because the context of language changes, well, the context! You may not care about proper grammar and think it's ridiculous, but it's in fact very important for proper, clear communication. The grammar you use or very slight differences in punctuation really can make a world of difference and completely change the meaning of what you say.
As is proven by the number of internet melodrama-butthurt-fests I've seen spring up across every site by a simple misunderstanding of miswording or poor grammar/sentence structure...

I would have to agree. It would be kind of annoying if people walked around: tlking liek dis cuz yknow dey dunt kno grammers. Hard to read, right?

I am sorry to interrupt here, but I have to disagree. People tend to not understand what grammar is. You don't have to learn grammar to know how to write properly, if you know how to speak properly and you know how to write down what you say, then you have no need for grammar. Grammar's just knowing what a group of word's function and nature is (oh god help us, I hate speaking french), and helps you in basically no way.

tlking liek dis cuz yknow dey dunt kno grammers.

This is spelling, not grammar. There is also vocabulary and conjugation. Grammar is just the analysis of a group of words and unnecessary most of the time. I do think bases need to be learned, but no further, it isn't important.

Do we need to study grammar to learn a language? The short answer is "no". Very many people in the world speak their own, native language without having studied its grammar. Children start to speak before they even know the word "grammar". But if you are serious about learning a foreign language, the long answer is "yes, grammar can help you to learn a language more quickly and more efficiently." It's important to think of grammar as something that can help you, like a friend. When you understand the grammar (or system) of a language, you can understand many things yourself, without having to ask a teacher or look in a book.

[The Great ME!]

I am sorry to interrupt here, but I have to disagree. People tend to not understand what grammar is. You don't have to learn grammar to know how to write properly, if you know how to speak properly and you know how to write down what you say, then you have no need for grammar. Grammar's just knowing what a group of word's function and nature is (oh god help us, I hate speaking french), and helps you in basically no way.

tlking liek dis cuz yknow dey dunt kno grammers.

This is spelling, not grammar. There is also vocabulary and conjugation. Grammar is just the analysis of a group of words and unnecessary most of the time. I do think bases need to be learned, but no further, it isn't important.

Well there's a difference I think between "learning" grammar(i.e. school) and "knowing" grammar.
You could never go to school but learn how to use grammar correctly, for example. And grammar isn't really important to spoken language so much as written language(which we normally HAVE to do on the internet).

I actually saw another thread here on CS. Can't remember which one(something on the suggestions board), but someone said something with a comma before the word "You", referring to the others on the thread, then went on to say something else about how people might abuse a certain sort of system.
Then, someone read it as though the person was accusing them of being the ones who would abuse the suggested new system just because they put the comma in the wrong place and started arguing angrily at the person.
Just one example I've seen(though I've seen many more similar situations).
In spoken language, it's not really important, but it can seriously change the meaning of something to mean another thing that's entirely different just because you put a few commas in the wrong place.

Actually, a lot of companies use misleading grammar in forms like contracts and such to confuse people as to the context as well. So it can be deliberately exploited to those who don't pay a lot of attention to that.

And, again, you don't necessarily have to learn grammar in school to know how to use it. You could pick it up simply by reading a lot of books or magazines, and we have a lot of written material in our society to do so from in this day and age. But anyway, you should still at least learn the basics of how to properly use grammar in written language, because it is important, even if it's not always necessary!

[Aaaron]

I am sorry to interrupt here, but I have to disagree. People tend to not understand what grammar is. You don't have to learn grammar to know how to write properly, if you know how to speak properly and you know how to write down what you say, then you have no need for grammar. Grammar's just knowing what a group of word's function and nature is (oh god help us, I hate speaking french), and helps you in basically no way.

tlking liek dis cuz yknow dey dunt kno grammers.

This is spelling, not grammar. There is also vocabulary and conjugation. Grammar is just the analysis of a group of words and unnecessary most of the time. I do think bases need to be learned, but no further, it isn't important.

Well there's a difference I think between "learning" grammar(i.e. school) and "knowing" grammar.
You could never go to school but learn how to use grammar correctly, for example. And grammar isn't really important to spoken language so much as written language(which we normally HAVE to do on the internet).

I actually saw another thread here on CS. Can't remember which one(something on the suggestions board), but someone said something with a comma before the word "You", referring to the others on the thread, then went on to say something else about how people might abuse a certain sort of system.
Then, someone read it as though the person was accusing them of being the ones who would abuse the suggested new system just because they put the comma in the wrong place and started arguing angrily at the person.
Just one example I've seen(though I've seen many more similar situations).
In spoken language, it's not really important, but it can seriously change the meaning of something to mean another thing that's entirely different just because you put a few commas in the wrong place.

Actually, a lot of companies use misleading grammar in forms like contracts and such to confuse people as to the context as well. So it can be deliberately exploited to those who don't pay a lot of attention to that.

And, again, you don't necessarily have to learn grammar in school to know how to use it. You could pick it up simply by reading a lot of books or magazines, and we have a lot of written material in our society to do so from in this day and age. But anyway, you should still at least learn the basics of how to properly use grammar in written language, because it is important, even if it's not always necessary!

I understand and I wholeheartedly agree.