Either of them are fine with criticism. LiYang is a more narrow case. I enjoyed seeing him and Alice talk. LiYang often takes diversionary tactics, while TC is more prone to exhaust an argument and have people tap out (exasperation counts). However, TC is also at times quite willing to drift off-topic so you have to "hey, what were we arguing about?"
(Sometimes it's just a set up for a chance at refutation.)
LiYang might come into contact with more people via work, but I assume a lot of his antics here aren't things he does at-large. He's always said "fuck you sociopaths" when coming here, so this place is, like for many here, some weird refuge. Perhaps he'll gain better perspective in actual more and varied debates.
Do you have a topic at hand where you've debated either of them and thought, hmm, that went well?
What is your evaluation for if it "went well" or not? Is debate a binary win/lose proposition? I suppose I have considered this discussion or conversation, especially given the reality of the stakes involved (as in, practically none).
I consider it positive if either side learns something or takes a point to heart, and gives real effort and thought in response. And in that regard, I've had way more of that experience with TC than LiYang. Like I said, LiYang is a more narrow case, though, and generally involves matters safer not to ...expend my time in as much.
