http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame21.html (that's me)
But seriously, just because Craeonics or Paxx want to redefine what the word "debate" is to being something ugly and nasty is meaningless.
As someone with considerable experience in DEBATING and DISCUSSING I can say that few people fit the stereotype that Craeonics and Paxx believe (that people who like to debate just want to show off intelligence).
Perhaps debating can be seen more as a strategy game where people of opposing sides attempt to use facts and evidence and sound arguments to convince a third party that their opinion is more valid than the other. Whereas as discussion in design to convince the other party to change their view.
Hence: Debates are about "winning" the hearts and minds of observers and discussions are about winning the hearts and minds of those you are discussing with.
Most of the people I have debated with are fun, intelligent, and caring people. Anyone who's spent much time on news://news.stardock.com/stardock.discussion.politics knows that all the people there are interesting fun OPEN MINDED guys and gals.
For me on skinning sites, I generally am into what you would term discussions. But I will get into a debate when someone makes a fairly radical statement that doesn't seem at all backed up by reality and challenge them to back up their claims.
For example, take Craeonics' statement:
"I have this theory (I have many theories, none of them backed up by "facts") that people who like to debate are incapable of speaking in a compact, to the point manner. and try to hide this by focussing on specific details while ignoring others."
Even Crae admits that his hypothesis is just a gut feeling. For instance, maybe he just feels that when I debate that I ignore some details and focus on others and hence has generalized ita ll to be all people who like to debate.
My response to that would be that those who like to debate are more verbose specifically because of the need for qualifications. A good debater qualifies their statements and that takes more time.
Afterall, it's a lot easier to just say "People who like to debate are close minded." That's pretty short. It's a baseless claim (or "a stated opinion" for you warm/fuzzy types

)
COMPARED to a valid argument:
"People who like to debate are often appear as close minded when it comes to taking into account that other points of view may be valid. For example, on the website kuro5hin, there are several current debates (link link link) in which it's obvious from reading the whole of the responses that the people making the statements are not even reading what their opponents are saying. Instead, they focus on specific statements, make strawman arguments out of them in order ot bolster their already set in stone opinon. Given that the majority of discussions there seem to be that way, I feel it's valid to say that people who like to debate are close minded in general or at least on that site which I've seen no evidence to imply that it isn't that way elsewhere..." (btw, I dont' actually agree with this, I'm just demonstrating why a GOOD debater's posts are lengthier than a poor debater's posts).
You see how much more effort it takes to make a VALID argument than to make a baseless claim.