We each have slightly different ways of debating (and disagreeing). But I do agree with the point quoted from the article, that a good oponent will try to find your main point, and debate that -- as opposed to getting all pedantic with semantics or side remarks, as often happens in message boards. A while ago I read somewhere (unfortunately I forgot where), about Karl Popper's style of debating, that rather than attacking the obvious weaknesses in the arguments of his opponents, he would focus on the strengths, interpreting them in the best possible light and even improving upon them, before endeavouring to refute them. I thought this was an admirable form of debating, though it's no doubt a difficult standard to keep. We're only human.

__________________
"All your bias are belong to us." Ara Pacis
"A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire