I also conceited that rigid time limits are not perfect, just better than what was presented.
As far as life fact check goes, there is a difference between arguing a point and making a false assertion. A proper and truly neutral live fact check would shut down false assertions, allowing the debaters to focus purely on arguing points.
This level of naive idealism is entirely pointless. It will NEVER happen. The establishment might not allow an unmoderated debate, but at least that's feasible debate. Having a mythical "truly neutral moderator" is wishful thinking.
Stop imagining systems and structures that are built around having a central authority figure. Those roles will NEVER be filled by those pure people you want to imagine into existence. It's an impractical fantasy.
I also conceited that rigid time limits are not perfect, just better than what was presented.
As far as life fact check goes, there is a difference between arguing a point and making a false assertion. A proper and truly neutral live fact check would shut down false assertions, allowing the debaters to focus purely on arguing points.
This level of naive idealism is entirely pointless. It will NEVER happen. The establishment might not allow an unmoderated debate, but at least that's feasible debate. Having a mythical "truly neutral moderator" is wishful thinking.
Stop imagining systems and structures that are built around having a central authority figure. Those roles will NEVER be filled by those pure people you want to imagine into existence. It's an impractical fantasy.