other way). A fruitful discussion often takes many unexpected twists and turns that can't be controlled by a rigid forumla. I wonder if this model can pass its own test? In essence it says "This is the ideal way to have a discussion." Well, we need evidence of this (point #3). And "If one of your arguments is shown to be faulty, will you stop using it?" I think one can find many faulty unstated assumptions reflected in this model (some pointed out here). If they are shown to be faulty, it should not be used. guest tineye is a service you can use to find images on the net. I use them to help identify art theft, but it's also useful in locating the original posting of an image in order to credit the owner/creator. Charles Nah, just irrational people. Charles You seem to have missed the part about the person asserting a position -- e.g., god exists -- bearing the onus of demonstrating its truth. Did you sleep through logic class? Charles Yes, irrational people would think these rules suck. Chalksoul Some of the point sonly work if the topic is evidencebased. For example taste in music, philosophy, politics etc are mostly subjective but can still be discussed. Litesp33d It was Carl Sagan who put forward the idea that "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" It sounds great but I take issue with it.  Why should an extraordinary claim require extraordinary evidence.  Why shouldn't extraordinary claims require  just ordinary