You'll notice this thread is, perhaps ironically, in a discussion section. So no debating about debate, please.
What are the features of a good debate? I intentionally use the word "good" here, knowing it means different things to different people. Perhaps a good debate, in your mind, is a productive one, one you are glad you engaged in (or watched/heard), one you learned something from, one you felt was a worthwhile use of your time, or some other positive attribute. I leave it to you to explain how you understand the term in context of this conversation.
What are the elements or features of such a debate?
I think a good debate has many factors.
1. Insightful: Willing to open oneself up to others opinions or see in their shoes. Example, "oh. I believe homosexuality (as an action) is a sin; 'but' I understand what you mean when the action and perception of that action are involved within a strong relationship."
2. Understanding: The need and patience for each person to ask questions for clarification sake. The patience to speak out ideas and the skill to find conclusion in idea(s) presented or signal if one idea needs to move on to the next
3. Topics: A good debate is not limited to some topics over others. So, political topics, religious, I don't know, culinary topics may have strong opinions by debaters but "both" sides have equal say in their views and both sides should be accredited to their views even if the other side disagrees.''
4. Knowledge: If a person is not knowledgably about a given topic(s), then he or she would know that that topic may not be for that person. For example, I know little to none about Hinduism. So if Hindus wish to debate for the sake of learning and not needing to win, I wouldn't participate because I don't have the basics to keep up with that conversation.
5. Agree to disagree: This helps close off the conversation. When conversation debates are left hanging, it causes more mishaps than saying "there's not much more we can say now..." and so forth
6. Debate vs. Argument vs. Discussion
Debate is when you make as statement or claim and you have the ability to support that statement or claim to validate what you say is worth listening to, has authenticity, and "proves" you know something for what you're talking about. So, for example, if one says "god exists" but then leave the other person hanging, that phrase means nothing in the debate. Debates hinge on support.
Argument is when one doesn't attack the ideas (as above with support) but attacks the person "as if" they are the ideas they dislike or disagree with. When feelings become involved and things are taken personal (even on the onset of the discussion), it's no longer a debate and definitely no longer a discussion.
Discussion just involves talking about different opinions, learning from each other (which is essential in debates to), and basically just being open to converse without needing to support every point said. Sometimes discussions are masks as debates because one person asks for clarification or they just genuinely want to say why they feel differently without needing to prove it at the same time.
7. Debates have good and productive support. The support can be technical such as from a science book or say a peer review. It can be testimonial. Personal experiences usually support why people believe what they do and how they came to that knowledge (for themselves) even if others cannot understand it. Support can be hearsay. Anything that one person gives another to justify their statement or claim is considered support. Unless both parties know the type of support should be the criteria of a said debate, a good debate takes in mind all different supports and challenges them as support rather than belittling them as they don't meet the criteria of their own definition of support.
8. Productive: Debates should at least let each person "leave out" with something they didn't understand or a view that they understand the perspective even if they disagree. I've seen people from multiple religions on RF who say their views won't change despite the debates. If that is so, then what's the point in debating? If you can't learn something different or different perspective (via preconceived biases maybe), then debate is useless. Maybe have a discussion but not a debate.
9. Same criteria of authority: The criteria of debate should be agreed between the parties involved only. Anyone outside that party has no say in which side is right or wrong (or should be). Ideally, it would be the people involved. So, if an atheist and christian debates, unless the Hindu wants to accept the authority in which the debate is founded on, there's no reason to join.
There are others, but that's how I define a good debate.