The Instigator
Johnicle
Pro (for)
Winning
37 Points
The Contender
iamsano
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

A Tournament System on debate.org should be implemented.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2008 Category: Technology
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,649 times Debate No: 3250
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (25)
Votes (15)

 

Johnicle

Pro

First of all, I would just like to point out that this is more of an attempt to get the word out than actually debating an issue. I would not mind if it stayed in debate challenges for a long time because I would still be getting the word out. However, if someone is to challenge me, I would consider the voting after the two rounds as being if you think it would be a good idea and who convinced you of that. I would appreciate comments on the bottom of the debate. Now... to prove why I think this should be "implemented", first I want to explain HOW I think it should be done.

1. The tournaments would be set up by debate.org itself.
This is so they stay fair and reasonable. It would be ridiculous if we allowed everyone to set up tournaments.

2. Closed voting system.
First of all, the closed voting system would consist of assigned judges of some sort. This would prevent people from making multiple profiles and voting for them self.

3. There would be at least one per month.
I would presume that each tournament would take a while since there would continue to be 3 day speech time (unless this would be lessened for some reason). But I would suggest having a week to sign up prior to the first round of debates beginning.

4. The debates would be 3 "rounds" with a set debate topic that would be set by debate.org.
To make the debates long enough but not too long, I think 3 rounds would be the best. Also, as far as what would be debated, I would think that the website setting up a new "resolution" for each tournament.

5. There will be some sort of prelims and/or bracket to break it down to a final round.
This would be the best part, after the tournament has been going for a while, there would be a final round between the two best debaters of the tournament. The way to decide the two best could be decided a number of ways. There could be a bracket (single or double elimination) down to the final round. Or simply could be a couple debates and the top two people with the best record will break to finals. This would have to be determined by the creators of the site them self. I would think that it would be best to try a few different styles then determine what the best method is.

(just so everyone knows, all of these are merely suggestions and by no means are how things would be run)

The rest are just merely reasons as to why I think that a tournament system should be implemented.

1. Tournaments are the ultimate form of competition.
When you have tournaments, there is more than just one vs. one... It's more like one vs. twenty... I don't suggest that this would be all debate.org would be (as I would assume that normal debates would be able to continue)... but simple that it could be something new that debate.org would offer.

2. Tournaments would make online debates more important and paid attention to.
If I debate someone online right now, people that I tell seem to not care as much as I think they would if it was in a tournament. It would definitely point out some of the people on this website that have true talent in the form of debate.

3. More people would join debate.org
I honestly think that if I could tell people about debate.org WITH a tournament system, that they would be a lot more interested in joining.

-In the end, I simply see debate.org as even BETTER with a tournament system (even though it is awesome right now)... Please comment what you think just for feedback sakes... Thanks for your time!
iamsano

Con

My name is sano and i oppose your idea of having a tournament on debate.org because i believe it cant work and i am gonna give you my reasons.

Lets first analyse your suggestions. you said that debate.org gonna set up the tournament and then you gonna have a close voting system.

On debate.org, people dont even have the chance to choose a side, like in this one, i was forced to oppose you and i dont know how debate.org gonna solve that problem in the first place.

secondly, you dont even know if people out there have the time and the courage to do this.
You are talking about hundred of people signing up for a tournament and i dont even see how efficient will this be. What incentive does debate.org has to read about more than hundred people's cases and make decisions at the end of the day?

My second question is, how are you going to allow the new debaters to join the tournament once it has started? because i believe we have new people signing in almost everyday. If no, what would those people be doing then because they wouldnt want to read about people's debate if they had no vote to make.
And even if normal debate gonna go on as you said, i dont see how people would be able to debate in a tournament and to have a normal debate at the same time.
My third question is, are people gonna have the same topic? if yes, then people can just copy arguments from each other because they will be posted on the web. I dont see how that is going to help.
If people are able to make many profiles so that they can vote for themselves as you said, i dont see why they wouldnt be cheating then by taking arguments from others.
So as a matter of fact, your suggestions can not work. now lets look at your arguments.
Another problem with your case is that there is no clear mechanism on how debate.org is gonna do this. you use word like there is gonna be some sort of prelim, how many rounds? we dont know.

1- First of all you said that Tournaments are the ultimate form of competition but i believe that tournament can only be efficient if all the participants are in the same place, have the same motions, debate at the same time, judged by different adjudicators at the same time. That is just impossible here my dear. I am in Thailand for instance and i dont even make it to debate.org all the time. I might come once or twice a week and it will not be fair to forfeit my debate if i dont make it on time.

2. secondly you said that Tournaments would make online debates more important and paid attention to. You mean more people will be then reading topics on the site just because it is a tournament.. not necessarily my dear. How happen then when people are eliminated? what happen when people lose a debate? where should they go? who should they ask for justification? i believe people wanna know why they win or lose. This might even make people lost faith in debate.org and we dont want that i guess.

3. You also assume that more people will join the debate...just not true.

I believe we should keep to the status quo and people can debate anytime they wish to. people can still learn if they want to. we can all debate with different peiople. we can even invite people to debate against us. the tournament model will not do much here because cheating is not prevented. people dont know who their judges are. people are not able to have dbeates at the same time and so on.
Thanks man and have a nice day.
Akim
Debate Round No. 1
Johnicle

Pro

Thank You for taking this debate, as you may have seen from the comment section, a tournament system will be implemented, but still, the debate continues, should this happen. May there be good arguments on both sides to hopefully makes this tournament idea a success.

"i believe it cant work"-->

The relevance of this argument seems to be lacking. It not being able to work is more of an argument on if it's a good idea, but even an idea that's not good can still be implemented. But besides that, it is a good idea and it can work. Sure it may take time and a few fixes but it will work, but I'll save that in rebuttal's.

"On debate.org, people don't even have the chance to choose a side"-->

This argument is simply not true. People do have the choice on whether to take a debate or not. You chose to take this side of a debate, besides that, if you wanted the side that I was on, you could of started a new debate. In this tournament, there may be one resolution with forced sides, but you still have the right to refuse debating that side. There is always a choice.

"you don't even know if people out there have the time and the courage to do this."-->

Off of this argument, I simply would like you to look in the comment section. There are all sorts of people eagerly awaiting this tournament system to start up. I've also seen other people talking about it in OTHER debates. The Chuck Norris profile pic guy supports it along with a person he debated. It is wide spread and the support could not be higher. In fact, you are the first person that I have heard that opposes the idea.

"What incentive does debate.org has to read about more than hundred people's cases and make decisions at the end of the day?"

Answer: I would suggest that debate.org should create a pool of unbiased judges willing to take a tournament off in order to judge a tournament. I, for one, wouldn't mind judging for a few tournaments. I've seen a few others that I would trust to judge also such as littlelacroix, karlynjane, yraelz (and the whole clan of "debate is my hobby" people), the debate webmaster, and clsmooth to name a few. With a pool of judges, it could be done really easily. Of course I would want to be in some of the tournaments, but eventually you may need to take your turn judging.

"how are you going to allow the new debaters to join the tournament once it has started?"

Answer: Certainly there are several new people joining this site, however, there will be more than one tournament. They may have to wait a while to be able to enter one, but eventually they will be able to enter (in the mean time, they may be able to get used to online debate)... Again, I would hope that we would be able to run at least one tournament per month. I would say that there would be debate "resolution" submitted for each month that will be debated on both sides by all debaters. The elimination process is up to debate.org itself but I would certainly hope for a final round in order to see the best in action.

"i don't see how people would be able to debate in a tournament and to have a normal debate at the same time."-->

They would have a choice to make on where to spend their time of course.

"are people gonna have the same topic?"

I think the same topic would be a good idea. Although, a good idea would be to hide each of the debate rounds from other people within the tournament. I personally wouldn't take arguments from other people because I like arguing my own argument ideas because they make more sense to me. But these debate rounds within the tournament don't have to be broadcasted live like they are in normal debates. Maybe after they are done, but then it would be too late as people would already of developed their own arguments anyway.

"Another problem with your case is that there is no clear mechanism on how debate.org is gonna do this. you use word like there is gonna be some sort of prelim, how many rounds?"-->

I don't know exactly how debate.org is going to do it, but the webmaster said I was pretty close in hitting the nail on the head so my suggestions may be fairly close to what it is. But the amount of prelim rounds will probably have to be determined by the amount of people entered. After a while, when we got the feel for how this is going to run (as this is the first site to ever try this as far as I know) they will be able to set it more appropriately.

"First of all you said that Tournaments are the ultimate form of competition but i believe that tournament can only be efficient if all the participants are in the same place, have the same motions, debate at the same time, judged by different adjudicators at the same time."

Again, this is the first time that this is being attempted as far as I know. It will not be the same as the live tournaments people are used to. But it still should be implemented. There will be some getting used to, but we all must move together. Lower in this paragraph you talked about people forfeiting rounds... I hope there will be less forfeiting, but it is still their responsibility to post in time.

"secondly you said that Tournaments would make online debates more important and paid attention to... not necessarily my dear"

Certainly I think that the final round debates will have more focus on them. It will separate some very talented debaters on this site that usually go overlooked by the normal person. I will definitely be reading all final rounds unless I am restricted to somehow.

"You also assume that more people will join the debate...just not true"

Although this sounds like an assumption, it is not. I wouldn't doubt it if I could get 10-20 people to join this site JUST for the tournaments. I wouldn't even be to surprised if I could get coaches from my circuit to join so they could get into some of their own debating in the off season. There might even be coaches reading this right now waiting to try their hand in a tournament. Once this tournament system is up and running, I am going to be telling everyone on facebook and at school about it that I can.

"I believe we should keep to the status quo and people can debate anytime they wish to."

Unlike Barak Obama, I want change, but I'm not afraid to say how. Change is often times a good thing, we can't be afraid of it, and we can't be afraid to tell others how we want it, this is the change that I want it and this tournament system should be implemented. Vote Pro if you want but this debate was more of a discussion. Thanks for this round.

Final suggestion- In every event, there is always the "big event"... why not for online debate. I would say that once a year, there would be a huge tournament to last maybe a little longer to determine the champion of that specific year. It would be cool anyway.

Thank You!
iamsano

Con

Thank you so much for replying.
First of all, when i said that it was impossible, it was simply because you never told me how things would be implememnted. You kept saying that things will be implemented and you never told me how.
It is a good idea i guess, but can it be implemented? that is the question you need to answer. It is like saying that the whole world should use the same currency...if you have this kind of proposition, you should then tell me how things gonna happen and why all countries would go for that.

You cant tell me that people have the choice. because starting a new debate does not mean you gonna challenge me. and when you have hundred of people debating, how you gonna decide on sides. you need to explain that if you wanna win.
If you believe that, you can say no if you wanna refuse a side, i dont see how that is going to be happen at the end of the day.

You cant just say that people want this and we should then have it. I also believe that people should not decide based on what they feel, they should look at the arguments given. The problem with you is that you never give any strong argument to prove your proposal. Your arguments are based on assumptions and that is the problem.

I asked you about the incentives and you said yes debate.org will create a poll of good judges and you know some of them. I dont know anybody out there.
how efficient will those people be to sort out all the debate.. and you remember you said you gonna have a tournament for a month and new debaters will have to wait for that long.

you said i wouldnt take arguments from other because you would like to have your own. I believe everyone is not like you and that is why you said that people are creating profiles just to vote. With that problem being there, i dont see how it is gonna help people at the end of the day.

It seems that you have nothing as your own arguments. you talked about the webmaster and comments from people. You are proposing something and you should not say you dont know how many rounds you want? you dont know how things gonna happen and as a debater you can not say that debate.org gonna do everything.

You also said you hope there will be less forfeiting without any proof on that i can also say i hope people wont be able to make it. You need to tell me why we gonna have less forfeiting.

As Barack Obama, I want change.. That is good but Obama has told to the American people how he wanna have the change... he never said that democratic party will do everything. He should be doing the same thing i guess. How you gonna do things, and how you make things workable.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 2
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
This is already online dmoore......
Posted by dmoore 8 years ago
dmoore
I know debate.org could do it if they wanted to. And if they do I am open for judging.
Posted by Brik 8 years ago
Brik
I would like to be in this debate tournament. I will debate (preferably) or judge, whatever. Lemme know where else I have to post to get officially on the roster!
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
I'll do it, well, providing other people actually do.
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
READ IF YOU WANT TO TRY ONLINE DEBATE TOURNAMENTS... Since the release of the new website has been pushed back to June of 2008 (I wish the best of luck to parenthood:) but anyway, I have decided to attempt to run a tournament system off of facebook. If any of you want to join, I will try to make it by the end of today (March 23)... I will name the group "Online Debate Tournaments"... Once you get on, there should be some more explanation as to how I'm going to try to run it and what you have to do to be in them. I will try to get the first tournament started by April 1st... Thanks and I hope to see you on facebook!
Posted by Webmaster 8 years ago
Webmaster
Hi Debaters,

Great debate topic here. While I can't get into specifics, I can say that Johnicle has come pretty close to hitting the nail on the head in regard to one of our super secret classified plans....Guess it's not so classified anymore. Also, we still plan on releasing some teaser shots of the new website. Look for them along with some more information in the next few days. We are working extremely hard to get the new site up and running for everyone. The project is bigger and better than we could have ever imagined. If only we didn't have to sleep...
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
Well, if the next system doesn't have any tournament system, I will be running one from facebook. Oh and btw karlynjane, me and littlelacroix debated twice on the nuclear topic after debating it on here... once in the quarterfinals at state. talk about irony but both my cases changed A LOT anyway but still... they were great rounds tho
Posted by karlynjane 8 years ago
karlynjane
i'm up for a debate on any LD topic from the past three years, as long as it's not the nukes topic (just in case any other LDer who will be at the toc reads debate.org, i'd rather not have my prep on the internet)
Posted by littlelacroix 8 years ago
littlelacroix
i'm mainly up for this cause i don't have anymore tourneys left. and i would love to set up an ld tourney on here. that'd be pretty awesome
Posted by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
LD... HECK YA... it's the debate with the most logic an philosophy so of course I love it. But either way, debate's debate, and debate tournaments are the best thing I do so if I can do it more... well... more fun.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by jiffy 8 years ago
jiffy
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by meganlg43 8 years ago
meganlg43
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Creator 8 years ago
Creator
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by dmoore 8 years ago
dmoore
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by shaqdaddy34 8 years ago
shaqdaddy34
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by NOK_Domination 8 years ago
NOK_Domination
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by HCPwns95 8 years ago
HCPwns95
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by bigbass3000 8 years ago
bigbass3000
JohnicleiamsanoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30