I almost entirely agree (I think there was one point I found a little off the mark, but it wasn't major). I know this post isn't really about me - obviously it is in an entirely superficial manner, but it's more about debate in general - but I'd like to clarify my views on the topic which were poorly conveyed in the section quoted (also, we spoke about this in discord but might as well put it more concisely here).

Firstly, you're absolutely correct in saying that debate, especially contemporary debate, is not to do with the ideas themselves, rather the rhetoric used. As someone who appreciates good literary techniques, I actually quite enjoy rhetoric but when it is more important than the discussion and the topic itself, then it's negative. I said in my post that one should know what they're doing before doing this stuff, which is applicable to debate but also all sorts of political interactions.

Secondly, a point that isn't really a priority for this post but one I'd like to comment on nonetheless, is the target audience. When I advocate for debate, which is rarely (well, I think the left should debate within itself, but debating right-wingers is often pointless), it's more for the audience. We need to weigh up the benefits and negatives of each debate - some won't be worth it but others will. Assuming one is trained and knowledgeable enough to win, debate can be effective in certain situations. The situation really matters - e.g. never debate on their site/page (where they act as moderator) and preferably have some form of formal moderation. All things must be done to make the debate in one's favour in order to have a greater chance of proving the opponent wrong, which will deter fascistic tendencies in the audience.

People who have bigger general audiences, such as ContraPoints (who has recently came under fire for debating), shouldn't engage in such debates but people whose audience at any one time will be a few people plus the audience wherever they are will be less likely to spotlight an argument. For example, if I didn't totally detest being in confrontations, I could probably debate people if I tried hard enough and trained because I don't have a huge audience which is attached to me and the few who are typically have radical leftist beliefs, so it's not that much of a concern.

Again, I agree with (most of) what you're saying. This post was mostly just clarifying to people - not really you - what my beliefs are.

(Also, unrelated to the discussion, I prefer she/her pronouns btw)