DDO vs Edb8
Debate Rounds (4)
Resolved - DDO is better than Edb8
This is a shared BOP and a comparative debate about both sites.
1. Forfeiting results in a loss of conduct or possibly the debate
2. Any citations or sources must be used within the character limit of the debate
3. No new arguments in the final round
4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere
5. No trolling or semantics
6. No K's of the topic
7. My opponent accepts all of the following definitions and waives his/her right to challenge these definitions
8. The BOP is shared
9. First round is acceptance only. This debate has been set to be impossible to accept, so if you wish to do so, say so in the comments. If you find a way to accept the debate without me approving it, you will FF the debate.
10. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a loss of a conduct point and due to the severity of the breach may merit an entire FF of the debate.
With that being said, game on! :)
Well this should be a great debate. Thanks to Larz for accepting it.
better - of superior suitability, advisability, desirability, acceptableness, etc.; preferable:
This a debate about which site is better, not about which site has the potential to be better. Which site is better is directly referring to which site is of better quality currently
so lets get it poppin
C1) Higher Quality Debates
In terms of debaters there is virtually no comparison between the two sites. There are a few active debaters on edb8 that do some good debates, but the quality of DDO debaters is on a higher level. Just for reference we have Bluesteel, Thett3, Bsh1, Raisor , Whiteflame, Roy, 16k, Zaradi, Tylergraham, Danielle, and many more. That is just some of the people on the top of the list, and most of those are trained in formal debate. The only one that sticks out on Edb8 which is ironically my adversary, who happens to be an amazing debater.
Bluesteel, Thett3, Bsh, Whiteflame , Raisor, Zaradi, and Tyler are all formally trained debaters that generate high quality debates all the time. The others in that list along with many more are nearly as good or even just as good as some of the people that are formally trained. Roy has beaten most of the people out of the top members who are formally trained, and so has Danielle and neither of them have formal debate experience.
A good way to gauge this is to look at the tournament my adversary ran last year, which was the World Online Debate Cup. Both BSH and Ajab (DDO members won the tournament )  . Both of these were the two most serious contenders from DDO, with other users such as whiteflame and bluesteel not even participating. Even my adversaries own custom tournament highlights the high quality members on DDO and that was only two of them.
A) Active Membership
Even Edb8s own formula has them listed at only 334 active members currently , with only a little over 200 completed debates. DDO gets anywhere from 10 to 30 thousand visitors a day, with an active user base in the thousands. ( The active user base of Edb8 is also inflated, 300 is not really active, but what is considered active" ). One visit to the forums and debate section will confirm this. Just in terms of sheer traffic and users that come to the respective sites, DDO is dominating edb8 on every possible level
B) Users on Edb8
Some of the users on edb8 are harbored members that have been banned from DDO for generating poor conduct and content. Jifpop being one of the few. If they are banned from multiple sites for poor conduct, and then go to another site, the logical conclusion is to assume they are going to generate poor content. This lowers the content on edb8 when compared to DDO.
C) Summary of C1
P1 ) A site with more active members will generate more material
P2) DDO Has more active members by a substantial margin
C) On Balance DDO will generate more material
P3) A site with more quality members will generate better quality material
P4) DDO has more quality members by a substantial margin
C1) On balance DDO will generate higher quality material
C2) Net worth
Sadly a site is also gauged by the value of it. This is also no comparison. In terms of what site is better net worth plays an important roll in determining what site on balance is "better" or of greater quality.
This number fluctuates but most online sites that gauge the profitability of a site put Edb8 at less than 100 dollars, while DDO is over $200,000. The quality of something can easily be determined by price. As a 2 dollar bill has more value than a one dollar bill. When you equate the sites in terms of which has more value from a business standpoint, DDO far surpasses edb8 on any comprehensible level in this regard
C3) Types of debate
Edb8 strictly focuses on formal debate, while DDO focuses on formal and informal debate. There are both formal and informal debates on DDO which caters to all types of users. Some people like to debate, and generate good quality content but do not like a formal setting and just enjoy the discussion aspect of it. Edb8s forums are hardly used, and even the debate structure itself is based strictly on a formal setting. DDO has debates that can be both fun and formal, it embraces all types of users and just does not focus on one specific aspect of debate.
This in turn ties back into my C1 impacts, and attracts more members which then in turn increases the quality of the site just in sheer volume alone. The more members you attract , the better chance you have of getting high quality members. The more high quality members product higher quality material on the site. Tie this back into C1 and set it to an infinite regression
C4) Features and Aspects
Edb8 strictly has the forums and debate section, both of which are basically dead. DDO has the same material and does it better. We have the polls and opinions section. This alone generates thousands of users on a day to day basis which in turn we gain membership from. Again tie this back into C1. Any feature that generates a high user base attracts more members. Out of the members that are attracted, you will eventually gain a high quality member. Tie this back into C1 and run it as a infinite regression.
C5) User generated content
Again DDO is winning on this. We have members that contribute to member praise threads, fan fics, and many other types of user generated content in the forum. One that specifically sticks out is mafia which draws a gigantic crowd to the site. This may seem needless but it serves a needed purpose
The user generated content on the site does a variety of things. It not only stimulate people into participating and drawing new members to the site who then in turn contribute to the value of it, but it also sustains the membership we have. Some people get bored with debate. When people get bored with debate they then have nothing to do. When they have nothing to do they leave. Edb8 suffers from this problem. The difference in DDO and edb8 is that DDO sustains the membership because of the user generated content. If someone gets bored with debate, they are not simply going to leave the site. They are going to hop on google hangouts and chill, or go play mafia, or even write a fan fic or go make a game. This enables people to have downtime and keeps people active and interested in DDO
C6) Social Setting
The social setting on DDO is also miles ahead of DDO. As I said we have mafia, Google hangouts, messages that are active, the polls and opp section, along with countless threads that stimulate a social atmosphere. All the social interaction and features on DDO ties back into my point about stimulating and maintaining a membership base which then in turn feeds back into my c1 point about generating content.
All in all DDO is a better website. Larz may argue that his site is better at doing what it's intended to do which is formal debate, but that is not what this debate is about. This is a debate about which site is better from an on balance perspective, and there is virtually no comparison.
DDO has a social setting, formal debate atmosphere, less formal debate atmosphere, more features, games, a more active user base, and generates better content. When comparing the two, as I said there is no comparison.
I thank my opponent for opening his case.
DDO has no focus on progression. Users are "on their own," so to speak. Numerous attempts at starting up a buddy or "adopt a noob" program have routinely failed.
Edeb8 is different. Features like judge feedback, coaching, badges etc, encourage users to improve their skills. Features like secret topics make them broaden their skill base. The culture of edeb8 has also long been improvement focused, users frequently asking for and offering advice.
DDO has little support for different styles. Even their own debate structure is routinely abused, with "Round 1" almost always being only for rules and acceptance. When you're preparing for an LD tournament and you want to practice your case, for example, this isn't good enough.
Edeb8 is all about giving people options. We've had BP, LD, AP, Australs debates and countless more. We have support for things such as team, quick or video debating built into the site. Unlimited character debates, cross-examination, hidden participant/judges debates, unrated debates and more are quickly becoming staples which add both to the fun and the utility of the site.
DDO has intrusive, slow ads.
Edeb8 does not.
DDO allows you only to change header persistence and remove the annoying dots on the background.
Edeb8 allows you to customize the site background and colors to your liking, with a number of handy presets and a fun randomize option (and to share all this on your profile), allowing you to express your individual style. It allows you to fully customize your biography as well with rich text, fully showcasing our diverse community.
DDO has some bugs. Every site does, no matter how rare. Usually these will remain for quite a long time before Juggle gets around to fixing them.
I'm not saying edeb8 doesn't. However, I am improving edeb8 almost every day. Every line of code, I know inside and out. That's not just ensuring a relatively bug-free experience, but also adding new features to the site that you won't find anywhere else, and being helpful when members need help or have a feature request. A smaller community is also easier to manage in terms of removing trolls, spam messages etc from a moderation standpoint, meaning it's relatively less attractive to these undesirable types.
DDO actually has relatively advanced socialization option: a forum, messaging, places to share your views, and profile comments.
Edeb8, however, takes all this one step further. Examples of this include shoutboxes, at-tagging, groups, live chats, resources (unlike DDO's virtually inactive "blog"), status replies, the new issues section and more. Similarly, edeb8 also offers more styling options for debates.
C7: Judge Development
Literally the only thing DDO offers to incentivise judging is a judge leaderboard, which is based more on quantity than quality, and doesn't even apply to many debates on the site. Again, there have been community efforts to help this, but none have lasted long-term.
This is vital to edeb8, using a tiered judging model, leaderboard and sophisticated feedback methods to honestly appraise judges and help them provide more fair, balanced decisions. The site design and tier system also encourages more people to have a go at judging, and as a result, poor judgments are very rare indeed.
Edeb8 ensures higher quality through:
> Random tournament topics (not a bunch of "Goku vs Superman" challenges)
> A focus on feedback and improvement
> Meaningful judgments
> On-site pre-drafting rounds
> Autoforfeits and forfeit warnings
> And dozens of other things DDO doesn't have
While DDO does have more members, I would contest that ON AVERAGE edeb8 has better debaters. Here's why:
> People come to DDO for all manner of reasons. Perhaps only to vote in a poll. People come to Edeb8 specifically because they want to have fun and practice their debate skills.
> Edeb8's focus on improvement and training is not matched by DDO.
> We did have a higher AVERAGE placing in the WODC. Non-serious entries only shows that most DDO members are not serious.
> Even if quality members are initially attracted to DDO, many of the "quality" debaters pro mentioned also have accounts on edeb8.
That all improves the average quality of debates.
As for "harboured" poor members, the reason why they haven't been banned from edeb8 is because they've attempted to stick to the rules this time. Jifpop is an example: he had poor conduct here, but edeb8 showed him an entirely different side to debating. Now he's made a strong effort to improve his debate skills and has learned to back down when asked. This argument is like disparaging a church because they have former prisoners in their congregation. To give a counterexample, RationalMadman was banned from edeb8 because I refused to harbor somebody who refused to change their ways - bans do happen there too.
R2: Net Worth
Pro needs to prove why a higher net worth, which is entirely calculated by expected profitability, is better. A charity that does lots of good for the world is not inherently worse than a big profitable corporation - since edeb8 does not need to make a profit and is running on very low overheads, its profitability is not relevant to the site.
If we used a different worth calculation that took into account the utility of each site, then the numbers would likely be quite different. In whose favor the numbers would then turn is what the issue is in this debate.
R3: Types of Debate
Quite the contrary, edeb8 has a number of features specifically geared towards more casual debaters. The shoutbox, issues, group polls, reply linking etc are all examples of this. Even the debates are not strictly formal - we have quick "twitter style" debates and other fun formats, as well as more informal topic categories, unrated debates etc. Which, by the way, is significantly more feature-wise than can be said for DDO's debate formats.
Casual users do not necessarily need more members. A slow laid back discussion can be just as fulfilling as one where everyone posts quickly, much like a small town can be just as fun as a big city to some people.
If you've been reading my case so far, you'll find ample examples of features and aspects DDO lacks, which are only found on edeb8. The only two pro cited that aren't on edeb8 are opinions and polls. First, edeb8 does have polls (in groups) and the rather poll-like issues section. Second, the function of the opinion and poll sections (voicing an opinion) can, notwithstanding that, be quite easily replicated in other ways (such as with a forum thread). People were taking surveys and collecting opinions on DDO long before those sections were added. Third, the inclusion of other features on edeb8 can entirely offset this impact. For example, the fact that edeb8 might have a dedicated group and forum for a TV show you're interested in (as opposed to merely a poll about it), may attract a member to edeb8 who wouldn't come to DDO.
R5/6: Social setting
These are practically the same point: that DDO's community has stuff to do other than debate. I have two responses.
First, I'm going to take a wild guess and say most people here sometimes use Google, Facebook, Wikipedia, or any one of the billions of websites out there that aren't DDO. This in no way detracts from the DDO community. It's quite possible for folks to do other stuff on the internet, and come back to DDO for their debate-related needs. People DO leave DDO for all sorts of reasons. The thing is, they COME BACK. They log off DDO for a bit, check their social media, play some games, do some study, have a sleep, and then they're right back at it, refreshed and ready to debate once more. So while debaters need diversions, they need not be on the same debate site. The same is true for edeb8.
Second, people do play the occasional games on edeb8. They post in last comment threads and ramble randomly in the shoutbox. There's even a mafia group. The extent to which these things are done by users is most probably ON AVERAGE the same as DDO. For example, take forum posts. Edeb8 has an average of ~23 posts per day (dividing total posts on the forum by days the forum has been active). By the same criteria, DDO has ~1000 posts per day. But then, DDO has >~45 times more users. The rate at which people engage in diversions from debating such as the forum is thus likely exactly the same on both sites. This leads to a slower pace, and smaller groups for the games... but that's fine if you just want some entertainment to get your mind off debate. Or you could go to Youtube and chillax there for a bit. Whether it's edeb8 or DDO, people come back.
Edeb8 is a more niche site than DDO, but this does not mean it is an inferior site. Quite the opposite: edeb8 actually provides a superior service in terms of the utility it offers its members, which I submit, ought to be the ultimate criteria for this debate (not unlike how a "better hammer" is one that is more useful to people in need of a hammer, or a "better computer" is one that is more useful to people in need of a computer) - a utility that can be demonstrated by all of my arguments above.
DDO is a great site. Edeb8, however, is (arguably) the best.
Details on features described can be easily retrieved and verified through this site and edeb8.com respectively.
There are a few things I want to point out. Larz makes quite a few assertions during his rounds, which I will point out later. Also as I suspected he tried to show where his site excels because it focuses on a *targeted area*. Meaning he is stating that because his site focuses on formal debate, his site is better at producing quality stuff. There are two issues with that
(1) DDO focuses on formal debates as well
(2) This is a debate about which *site* is better, not which site is better at *certain* things.
Larz states that DDO fails compared to Edb8 in terms of progression. This is entirely false. He also asserts that the adopt a noob programs have failed. Some tournaments have not *finished* but that does not mean that they have "failed". Even if some of the new members get locked into real life activities that hinder them from finishing, they still are *learning* from the experience. Not to mention there are so many more things that DDO does.
(1) Ragnar has made a new users guide in order to help new members improve their efforts and how to learn about the site and debate
(2) Max has worked on and installed an entire new page for new members so they can learn about the site 
(2a) As you noticed in that thread, there is an entire list of members that you can contact with any questions in regards to the site, and all of those are willing to work with you on debating and improving. In addition to this a variety of experienced members including myself have offered to help any new members with debating and opened out inbox's to help them improve. Some of these members include zaradi, bluesteel, myself and many others
We as experienced members of the site encourage and stand behind improvement, and are more than willing to help new members learn.
(3) There are constant adopt a noob tournaments that help new users learn and that do well. One is in progress now 
Larz asserts that DDO does not have debate formats but this is false as well. The open structure of DDO enables any type of format. All you have to do is structure the debate in the first round, and proceed with the format you like. See a debate from Liz and how this is possible 
Larz is basically saying that his site gives you the option for video debating, team debate, and all these other features but DDO can do the same thing as well. The open format does not *target* a specific type of debate (formal) but allows member to do any type of debate they want. From music debates, video debates, team debates (see my profile, I've did quite a few), formal debate, non formal debates, etc. The open setup in Round 1 literally appeals to any type of user and you can structure the debate in *any* way you want. He will say his site does this as well, but DDO does it and does it better as Larz himself has stated he want's formal debate to be a driving force on his site.
This point is basically a non factor.
(1) A simple ad block fixes this.
(2) Adds actually help the site. Adds give juggle money, the money goes back into the site which then in turn is used to build up the organic hits on the site. They money also feeds back into paid for hits, and building a footprint on the web where the site can be easily found drawing in more members. For larz to do this and with the revenue his site draws, he would have to invest his *own* money into marketing and building an online presence where as DDO is owned by juggle and is profitable , so they are able to invest money into marketing from the add revenue.
Larz basically asserts you can change the color of a background, and the font of your profile. This is such a minor impact that it can be discounted in comparison to the *major* impacts I have presented. DDO allows you to customize your profile, just because you can't change the color of a background or bold text on a profile, does not make it a better.
R5) Bugs / Development
The bugs Larz is referring to is so minor that they are fixed instantly. He states he can fix bugs and knows coding, but the only bugs on DDO are normally minor such as the site error one, which is normally taken care of within minuets.
Larz asserts that his site can be linked to shout boxes tagging, etc. Again if you even count this argument it is a minor impact or even negated by the fact that DDO can update posts to the blog and is linked to facebook. Both sites have minor features with this, so trying to compare this is so marginal that it is not even an impact as both do little enough to cancel each other out.
R7) Judge Development
Larz then states that judging development on his site and the only thing DDO has is a leaderboard. The leaderboard by itself negates his argument, because while it does not improve the *quality* of the vote it does improve the *quantity* of the votes, and encourages users to vote in bulk. As far as improving voting procedures, you can tie this back into my R1. There are active experienced members, and voting guides that encourage people to vote properly. Both of these explain how to vote and experienced members take the time to work with newer members and show them how to vote properly. In addition to this when a bad vote is received, voting moderation leaves the reason why the vote is removed so the member is aware that his vote was removed and why, so he can work on how to place a better RFD.
This is the bare assertion I was referring to. Larz just asserts that we have more members but *on balance* his site has better debates. This is not even logical. His site only has 200 debates in total, and with an on balance perspective DDO has a collective history of amazing debates. Roy Lathams debate history alone beats out his entire site in terms quality and numbers.
Just by the sheer number of users, and the amount of quality users we have defeats this point. As members like bsh, whiteflame, roy, bluesteel, tyler, zaradi, have thousands of high quality debates when totaled up. He also asserts that fun topics are not of good quality but that is incorrect. Any topic can be a quality topic, and some of the comic topics are a way for good debaters to have fun and attract a certain user base
> Meaningful judgments (This is bias as DDO has quality judgments, he can't just assert that his site has quality due to preference. We even have an elect a judge system. There is not pretense for this point)
> Tournaments ( we have more than edb8 and have better quality members in them)
> Feedback (Negated already above)
> Pre Drat rounds ( this is not even a factor as you can draft arguments here as well)
> Auto FF ( Same on DDO except awarding the win which you will get anyway, non factor)
> Dozens of things > Bias assertion
He then asserts they have better debaters which is not true. I dare him to show a list of his best debaters and put it up against ours. There is no comparison, just our first page of the leader boards beats out edb8 alone, which was demonstrated in his own tournament that he made last year. Again just by the sheer number of users we get, we are more than likely just by odds, to get higher quality debaters just out of quantity. This is a proven fact when you compare both sites.
C2) Net worth
This is simple. This is a debate about which site has more value. Value is determined by a variety of things. The amount of profitability determines the *value* of something by definition.
The profitability of a site helps extend it's online presence which then in turn gains members
He says edb8 is geared to less formal debate while basing an entire round on why he has higher quality debates because of the focus on formal debate. See my R2 for format, to expand on this. The setup in DDO allows user to make any type of debate they want. From formal, to informal, to comic debates, fun debates, troll debates etc which appeals to everyone. Where as my adversary has stated hundreds of time, his site is geared to only formal debate
The opps and polls section alone beats all the features my adversary brings up. Strictly because of the traffic it draws and how the traffic is turned to profitability which then in turns extends to organic and non organic hits which draws new membership. The features he is referring to is changing a background or playing with the font of text. We have 4 main sections which are Debate, Ops, Forums, and Polls and all of them draw a specific crowd. Needless to say he says his site does it better, but just by preference and membership alone shows that DDOS style is preferred and does it better.
He says anyone can use the secondary features on other sites which is true, but DDO encourages it where as his site does not. We have nightly hangouts, mafia hangouts, and a vast push for social interaction. If anything mafia in the games forum alone negates his point.
Larz asserts you can do the stuff on here on different sites, which is true but DDO is a community where we actively participate as such. We foster a community presence and do those activities together and on site. Which is why mafia is so clique. It encourages people to stay on DDO because of relationships they have built, and the break from debating it gives them. Going to other sites is fine, but doing those activities on site such as mafia better increases the presence of the site online which adds to why it is a better site.
Impacts I'm winning on
1) DDO fosters a community presence and encourages people to participate in activities on site which increases the value of the site as a whole. (Mafia, Fan fics, Etc)
2) Profitability / online presence
3) More high quality members and debates
4) Debate formating
5) Encouraging all types of debate
6) Appeals to everyone
7) Social interaction
I thank my opponent for continuing his case.
It's not that I think edeb8 is better because it's smaller, it's that DDO isn't necessarily better because it's bigger. This is practically the only benefit pro clings to, and one he hasn't shown the merits of.
First of all, learning to use either site shouldn't be hard. Sovi/Jifpop has written a new guide for edeb8 members, not unlike Ragnar's for DDO (see http://tinyurl.com...). Likewise I have made a number of guides teaching members how to use different features (not sure if I should cite myself in a debate as a source lol), there's an analogous new member thread on edeb8, all new members are reached out to (often by multiple existing members) and all that. Our coaching system, unlike the adopt-a-noob programme pro pointed to, is actually designed for the long term rather than expiring every single month.
Edeb8 retains a number of key advantages that pro missed. First, features such as secret topics - which cannot be replicated in DDO by design - are key tools in helping people develop their skills. As such, edeb8's programmes are more effective. Second, edeb8's platform isn't just geared towards learning for newer members, but is open to and geared for everyone regardless of their current skill level. Third, most of these features do not require an explicit sign up. People can gain experience faster with the incentives edeb8 provides, without needing to go through the forum or the like. Fourth, the actions of the dozen or so members who participate in such DDO programmes are not necessarily indicative of the site as a whole, comprising of many thousands. Contrast this with edeb8, where formal and informal coaching is common generally due to the whole site culture being improvement-focused.
Pro's assertion that DDO allows any format is incorrect. A clear example would be a 4-way (BP style) debate, since every debate on DDO must have exactly 2 participants. Round structure can be awkward also: simulating an Australs-style debate with an acceptance round requires 2 debates, including one debate to be held purely so the affirmative can give their final reply speech, because DDO does not support reversing the speaker order in the final round. Thus, even when some features can in theory be tentatively emulated, the majority of popular real-life formats are either impossible on DDO or needlessly difficult to complete and judge.
This holds true for informal debate systems too. On edeb8 you can record and upload your video rounds right on the site. On DDO, you need to head off to youtube, record and upload your video there, get the DDO-friendly URL of your video, and paste and submit it over here. It's a needless level of complexity for a simple format. For team debates on DDO you need to get a moderator's permission and create a new user account just for the team. And if there wasn't any reason for user progression, there certainly is no incentive on DDO for team progression.
As for this idea of an open structure, edeb8 has that too. Except that we don't require the wasting of an acceptance round for that to happen, as debates on edeb8 can have separate rules for the debate.
1. The need for "fixes" implies the site has problems needing "fixing", which edeb8 does not.
2. Even if helpful to Juggle, ads remain annoying to users. What money does get reinvested into DDO is only generally spent on acquisition, which targets a broad range of users. I'm willing to bet few of the top users joined DDO because of ads. Further, it's counter-productive, because the ads which slow the site down also slow down search spiders, harming rankings on search engines.
Pro concedes edeb8 has more options here but claims it is not an advantage. He needs to show why this is any less major than his points. To see how important this is to people, just remember the outcry that has happened on DDO whenever the site design has been modernized and people have protested the new colors or layout or such.
Other bugs, on the other hand, remain persistant. Whiteflame's profile pic hasn't been appearing in search results for at least some months now, for instance. The difference is that Juggle has little incentive to polish minor bugs like this.
In addition, I explained two other impacts pro has not addressed:
1. Member support also having the power to fix stuff or improve stuff if need be.
2. Less spammers/trolls/mischief-makers.
Edeb8 is also linked to Facebook. When it comes to socialization, edeb8 one-ups DDO in basically every way imaginable, and pro thinks this is a marginal impact at best. When two sites both call themselves debate social networks, I'd say socialization is vital.
C7: Judge Development
Not only does edeb8 also have a leaderboard, but the assertion that the DDO leaderboard has increased judging quantity is plainly wrong. At the time of writing this, the last 10 post-voting debates on DDO had an average of 2 votes each. Using a consistent metric, the figure for Edeb8 is almost double that, at 3.5. So DDO is not winning on encouraging users to vote in bulk, but edeb8.
Edeb8 also has judge guides (http://tinyurl.com...) and experienced members, but the difference is that this focus is built into the entire site from the ground up - including but not limited to what badges a judge can get, what their ranking is on the leaderboard, their feedback/comments etc. Things that the community has had to catch up on on DDO are already there on edeb8.
The vote moderation system on DDO, even if perfect and the mods were perfect judges, doesn't address the majority of users, and certainly doesn't do much to encourage newer users to try voting if they thought their vote would count for nothing. This kind of negative reinforcement only works when people feel invested enough to vote again, and thus I'd be surprised if any great DDO judges have become so because of the vote moderation system. Contrast that with the edeb8 rating system for judgments.
It's not just a bare assertion. A site that has a million poor debates and 50 good ones (0.5%) has a far lower proportion of good debates than a site that has 200 debates even if the smaller site only has 10 good ones (5%), which makes it an inferior site overall. Roy may be a good debater, as are many others on here, but edeb8 can still have a higher average quality. DDO may have many times as many good debaters, and it's still irrelevant, so long as they also have significantly more poor-quality members (and edeb8 doesn't). I contest that for every 1 "good" member Mikal can find on DDO, I can find 3 "poor" members on DDO, and anyone else can do the same. While the good members raise the quality, the poor members also lower the quality to a greater extent than the good members can raise it.
It's not about more serious topics, but about more quality topics. Such as topics written by experts for major tournaments.
Pro never has negated the value of feedback to quality.
You can draft arguments on both sites - pre-drafting, persistant drafting etc is something else. Hence also why so many DDO users prefer to type up their arguments in Word first, since the DDO system is not as sophisticated as the edeb8 one.
And no, my debating record on here proves that a forfeit does not equal an automatic win.
Pro didn't bother to refute my 4 reasons for why edeb8 has higher quality members. Once again, many of the members he listed for DDO are also on edeb8. Additionally, 4 of the top 10 DDO debaters have made accounts there. Edeb8 may have way less users, but my rebuttal is merely that those users are disproportionately higher quality.
Note the dropped major point on poor members.
R2: Net Worth
I disagree that profitability is the sole determinant of value. See my charity example in the last round. A better standard is utility and pro has not argued against my claims that utility should be the ultimate standard for this debate. Pro is also yet to demonstrate why more members is always better.
I've never stated edeb8 is geared only to formal debate. Seriously, I want my opponent to quote where he thinks I said that, because the only time I mentioned formal debate in the previous round was to demonstrate that we do NOT only focus on formal debate, in rebuttal to this very point.
Pro otherwise refuses to engage with any of my material or rebuttal on this point.
To pro, membership numbers are everything. To edeb8, it's about the superior experience. Pro has yet to prove why more people is always good for a debate site, especially since the crowd that polls and opinions draws isn't necessarily the same as the crowd of "quality" members he refers to in his first contention. Membership also tells us little about preference, unless of course the people have also tried edeb8. People may prefer edeb8, but not know about it. By the same token I could argue that any one of edeb8's impressive features (say, Groups) draws an entirely different crowd which leads to more members, except that I don't see why maximizing membership numbers is at all a desirable goal.
My second rebuttal to this point - which conveniently pro ignores - that these social diversions do happen on edeb8, throughly negates the point that the site doesn't push for them. I further demonstrated that the rate at which this happens is analogous across sites, if you will recall my math.
Further, I deny that on-site activities add to the site presence. They do add to the social clique, but if DDO were to randomly shut down, the social clique would survive. Members wouldn't give up the strong friendships they have formed just over that, which is in part why they also contact each other on third-party social networks. Such personal connections can be made on just about any debate site, but DDO is still a debate site in essence. People know that and COME BACK for that, just as with edeb8.
Edeb8 remains (arguably) the best.
Thanks to Larz for accepting
Instead of contentions in this round I want to go over the impacts and who is winning what
This is the main impact for Larz. I will concede that his site allows you to do both team debates, and video debates on site. Meaning you do not have to rely on a third party system to do them. Larz will also concede that those same things can be accomplished on DDO, it just takes more effort to do it. He himself has participated in video debates on DDO, and we can see the countless team debates that occur on DDO. The only difference is that his site makes it more convenient. Both sites can accomplish the same things, but as I said his is on site. This would be a major impact for him if you could not do team debates or video debates at all on DDO. The issue is you can do them, it just takes more time. This mitigates the impacts significantly in terms of the weight it carries.
1) Higher Quality Members and Debates
Larz is trying to argue that his site has a *higher percentage* of high quality debate and members, which is an absolute straw man. If a new debate site is started, and they had 2 debates and 1 of them was high quality they would have half the debates on the site being high quality. The same logic is applied to members. That in no way makes it a better site than DDO. DDO on balance as *more* high quality debates and members in general. We have an entire 7 year archive of debates. People often come to the site when they are doing research topics for school and college because they find these debates. With the amount of members we have and thousands coming to the site on a day to day basis, we will pick up members that just show up and post a debate for fun and leave. That does not negate the amount of quality that is found on this site. He contests that there is 1 good member for every 3 poor members. This is shakey on so many levels as he would have to constitute what is a poor member. By his own assertion, anything that is *not formal* is of poor quality. Anything that is not drafted as a resolution for competitive debate is *poor quality*. This is wrong on so many levels.
1) A member can not debate at all and positively contribute to the site and be a good member and invest in the site
2) Just in formal debates alone, there is no comparison. Even if all of edb8s 200 debates were *good quality* which they are not, DDO has thousands upon thousands that are archived and active.
He then asserts I did not contest what makes his site *higher quality*. I contested this and shot it down in the last round. He was asserting that his site focuses on making members better, working on voting, etc. I showed that DDO does all of these and does it better with countless adopt a noob tournamnets, high quality members being listed on the main page as constant mentors, user guides, voting feedback through moderation, etc. Asserting I did not contest this is false. DDO has a progressive system designed to help keep members on the site and show them how to use it effectively. We have picked up countless new members and integrated them into the site.
2) Online Presence / Profitability.
I'm going to use this also as a rebuttal to pros contention about ads, and tie it in with my impact. Larz claims adds are intrusive, but they are necessary. Marketing is what I do on a day to day basis , so in terms of necessity I can indeed confirm why they are useful. He claims his site runs on low overhead which is fine, but think about this from a business standpoint. If you have a business that costs 5 dollars a day to run, but you are only making 5 dollars a day there is no money to invest in other areas . Meaning you are just making enough to sustain the business, or in Larzs case probably investing your own money into maintaining the site. He would have to come out of pocket to even pay for the sites website fee on top of sustaining any other issues with it. Sure it's a low overhead but there is 0 profit. The issue with this is you can't invest money back into marketing or increasing your online presence. There are hundreds of ways to increase an online presence, which starts with working on your digiitly footprint. You can run paid for hits, invest money to boost your website to the top of a search engine on the side and gain hits organically. Organic hits occur naturally , meaning by running adds on DDO juggle is actually able to make a profit and then in turn boost this sites online presence. If you google debate on google edb8 will be on the last possible page, where as DDO will be near the top. This is based on the profit of the site and what they do to boost organic hits. More organic hits mean more views and users, which means higher qulaity debates and members because of how easy it is to find.
The very definition of *value* in terms of which site is better underlines this contention. Value is based on profit, and sure non profitable organizations can do good but when you are doing a comparative debate revolved around numbers and statistics. The site that makes the most profit has the best chance of getting numbers and members online. This literally works with my quality impact to show that net worth is a primary contention in this debate by the very essence of the definition. Due to Larz making no profit it forces him to invest his own money, and even if he is running off low overhead that means nothing. DDO is making more than enough to offset the overhead and reinvest the money back into the site to make it more versatile.
3) Social Setting / User Content
Larz says social interactions occur on edb8 but I would advise anyone to test this theory. Go the website see the interaction on the forums. Sometimes days can go between a single post. The amount of social interaction on DDO is far greater by no comparable standard. Even if edb8 has mafia, it does not have it to a comparable degree to the amount DDO has. This impact is weighted on how much social interaction occurs. Just because 2 people talk on edb8 does earn him this point or refute my point. DDO has constant mafia games going, fan fics, user praise threads, nightly hangouts. All these occur on site instead of off. This encourages people to participate on DDO which then in turn fuels the Archive of material on the site and draws in new members. This is a great way to add a net beneift to the site (such as building an archive of material all on site) while helping people stay where they are not bored. Again just because 1 or 2 people talk on edbate (check the forums to verify the time lapse in between posts and activity) does not negate this point. The amount of social interaction and user generated content on DDO far surpasses edb8.
4) Appeals to everyone / encourages all types of debate
Larz has already dubbed *high quality debates* as debates that are typically formal debate. he even states this in his rebuttal to quality so consider this a concession
" It's not about more serious topics, but about more quality topics. Such as topics written by experts for major tournaments. "
Along with saying that high quality debates are only tournament style debates, he basically asserts this is the only type of quality you can have. I fundamentally disagree. Debate is the pursuit of knowledge. By limiting that to a *meta* you are disallowing quality topics that are not included in that meta. This could be comic topics, fun topics, or any topic for that matter that is not included in that specific target area.
Larz literally concedes that DDO appeals to more versatile user base by his own definition of quality debates and what he encourages on his site.
The rest of the primary contentions and impacts bascially cancel each other out and rely on larz making bare asserions. Larz says his site does a better job building judges and helping members learn debate. This is just an assertion based on no evdience. DDO does this equally if not more with the new members thread, open mentor system , adopt a noob tournaments, open message system, user guides etc. This completely shatters larzs point about quality or even his point that his site is more focused on building better members. DDO does the same, it just has more members. There have been countless members that were new that have become beyond valuable members. Myself, Debatability, Romani, DK, Fuzzy, Subtai, Sargon, BOT, Tuf, Zaro, wylted and so many more are all proof of this. When you are referring to jifpop as a quality member that produces quality content something is wrong and his points don't add up.
Socialization is virtually negated as both sites are linked to face book, while DDO has a blog and his site has a few hashtag features. This is not even a valid impact as both do this and the extent is very similar. We can negate this.
Site bugs. Larz just asserts there is a few bugs on DDO. As I have stated almost every bug is fixed instantly such as the "error" message. For this to be a valid impact it would actually have to negatively impact the site and in a high degree. It does not impact it to any noticeable degree so we can negate this point as he himself concedes that edb8 also has bugs along with any other site. Both sites get rid of them quickly.
Judge content and builidng new members. I have effectively just shattered this point as it is a bare assertion. He asserts his site builds members, well so does ours and we do it better. See the first paragraph of conclusion. If anything this impact is negated and canceled out, and if not it goes to DDO. This is no where in a realistic realm that edb8 does this better than DDO.
Formats , just underlining text on a profile page or changing your background does not add value to the site at least to any noticeable degree. We can get rid of this as well. If anything its minor
This is a debate about impacts. Larz has one impact, which is features. This is also been mitigated. While I have 4-6 that stand strong.
This is a clear choice
I thank my opponent one last time for a fun debate. In the spirit of the final round, I'll offer a few brief summaries as well.
What this debate is about
This debate is about which side demonstrated that their site has greater utility for its members. I made this point in R1 and it has been one of the few uncontested points in this debate. Obviously, since you're all here, DDO offers value to you. I'm not here to advertise for edeb8 or convince you to join - though, while I'm here, the World Online Debate Cup is coming up soon and y'all should totally compete! What I AM trying to do is demonstrate both that edeb8 does offer real value to its members.
Refuted Pro Impacts
I agree that DDO has more people. I countered this point in a number of ways. First I showed that edeb8 has features better suited to creating and attracting higher quality members. Second, I demonstrated accounts need not be mutually exclusive. Third, I showed this to be borne out by tournament placings. Fourth, I proved that the average quality on edeb8 is statistically likely to be higher. In terms of impacts, pro provided two: that this attracts even more members, and that this makes it possible to have higher quality debates. The former is begging the question; the latter is refuted by all the evidence.
Pro protests that average quality is irrelevant and that the sum of high quality members is more important. My opponent is the top-ranked debater on DDO, and his debate history is filled with far more newbies than experienced debaters. My history's the same, as is (I suspect) the history of most of you. When it comes to the utility both sites offer their members, DDO may have high-quality debates more frequently, but for the individual member, they are rare gems. By raising the average quality of debates, edeb8 achieves much the same end with greater individual utility.
Pro also contests that DDO has programmes in place to develop members. In R3 I demonstrated these are worse than edeb8's because 1) edeb8 has more effective, unreproducible tools, 2) edeb8's programmes are not only for newer members, 3) no explicit sign up, and 4) it isn't normalized like on edeb8. None of this pro had any response to.
I do marketing too daily; marketing was my degree. I know that at best, ads only generate money for a site - it is up to the site to convert that money into utility. Which pro has NOT demonstrated. Edeb8 is not a "business" and its value cannot be measured in Wall Street terms. It can be better conceptualized as a charity. Charities like soup kitchens or animal shelters do not usually earn profit, but they provide important value to the world. Pro thinks he's won this point only because he's doing a comparative debate which apparently must be based on "numbers and statistics". Literally, that's his defence on this point. I disagree because numbers don't inherently provide value to anybody.
Even if he did somehow win this point, I showed a number of negative externalities of this, such as the heavy presence of advertising on the site (which pro agreed was problematic in R3) and a profit focus that's detrimental to improving user experience as development becomes focused on other issues (not to mention moderation difficulties in removing trolls etc).
Pro has shown that DDO has more members, and earns more money. He has not shown why either of those matter to ordinary members like you and me. When he has given impacts, these either also exist on edeb8 or are better realized by the edeb8 platform. As such, pro's conclusion that DDO is the best is tentative at best.
Awesome Con Impacts
Features provide the clearest impact in this debate on user utility - sites with superior features tend to better satisfy users.
I have shown features that simply do not exist on DDO, but which do on edeb8. Secret topics, 4-way debates, cross examination rounds, hidden judges and more are among them. Further, I have shown how these in turn actually improve the user experience, for example by giving users a better platform for self-improvement in judge feedback, built in coaching etc (which, by the way, is much of the evidence behind my "assertion" that edeb8 is better suited to learning that pro thinks didn't exist - not to mention the whole cultural aspect to learning that I keep bringing up and pro keeps not answering). Pro ignored these. A few, such as profile customization, he has repeatedly asserted are "minor" at best, an assertion that is subjective at best. I showed that features such as that satisfy users, and that's what matters in this debate - in this case, giving them the power to determine how they want their site to look.
I have shown other ways in which edeb8 one-ups DDO. Socialization is a clear example. Both sites have features for socialization, and DDO is pretty good, but edeb8 does it better. Examples include groups, live chat, shoutboxes and more. Pro claimed the extent is "very similar" making this "not even a valid impact". He did not, however, evidence these claims, especially in light of the fact that:
a) "basically [better in] every single way" is a far cry from "very similar" - as I've routinely shown edeb8 includes numerous featurs that frankly are either only poorly done on DDO or entirely impossible; and
b) Pro hasn't been able to name a feature DDO has that edeb8 doesn't other than opinions and polls - a point so weak that even pro drops it in the last round. I showed that not only were pro's claims about this inaccurate, but that this was easily offset in other ways.
It's true some features can be, very roughly, emulated on DDO. I've done video and team debates on DDO, among many others. But edeb8's having built in support does not merely mean it is EASIER to set up - which is still adding to edeb8's utility, I might add. It's also more visible and more encouraged, which is ideal for developing debaters. Some features can only be emulated on DDO using third-party tools, such as live chats, but then, that's not utility DDO provides - DDO is merely providing the community to chat with. Edeb8 has that, and the community as well, proving its superiority in that respect.
A number of times in his case, pro accuses me of only catering to formal debaters, or that I've at some point defined quality to mean formal. It's an obvious strawman because I have made no such claim. I challenged him to source me on that. He couldn't. If you read what he cited, you'll note it says nothing about formality, and even notes that a topic does NOT need to be serious to be quality.
While high-quality tournament topics are available as a feature on DDO they are certainly not imposed, and I gave several examples in the debate of features that are specifically targeted towards more casual debaters. Further, I argued that even if edeb8 did not offer this (which it does), diversions on BOTH DDO and edeb8 are generally of an off-site nature, rendering this point moot at best. However, because I have shown features edeb8 has targeted at both serious and non-serious debaters, while pro's so-called "broad appeal" point has only touched on appeal to non-serious debaters. Edeb8 is the only site in this debate that caters to both. Even if edeb8 generally has a more niche audience, it actually offers better value to a broad audience.
Other Impacts (that don't really matter)
Pro's concept of a good social setting is clearly one with as many people as possible, and DDO does win on that front. As a result of that, the site is busier. However, I have routinely demonstrated that busy-ness is not vital for having good social interactions. You can have a slow laid-back town, for example, and it can be just as interesting to live in as a major city. Sometimes major cities just don't have the same community feel to them. Sure there are cliques as there are on DDO, but they're not for everybody. Hence why the majority of members do not play Mafia, and do not go on Hangouts, and generally don't NEED to participate in all that.
As such, this issue is moot. It comes down to what kind of social setting individuals want, and edeb8 and DDO will both provide the kind of utility they're after. This being said, I did show that even if this were not the case, the social setting is irrelevant because people can leave and come back, and also that most aspects of DDO's social setting exist on edeb8 too to a comparable degree (funny how pro never refuted the maths, numbers and logic I did provide, instead constantly telling judges to go on edeb8 and check for themselves how useless the site is - unfortunately for my opponent, I'm sure judges are smart enough to not make such arguments on his behalf).
Edeb8 has more features and less people. Both sides in this debate agree on that much. At the end of the day, this debate can swing one of two ways:
Option one: You agree that pro has not shown WHY more people is good. Pro's only argument for this, really, in the debate has been an assertion that more people leads to more good debates. However, I have refuted this with a truckload of substantive points throughout my case - notably, by showing that edeb8 is full of great debates.
Or, option two: you think pro has shown why. In this case it comes down to whether that "why" single-handedly outweighs the sum of my analysis, including a litany of features and improvements edeb8 has over DDO, and all the net positive impacts this has on edeb8's audience. It's a tall order to fill.
The key question you should be asking is which site delivers the net better utility. I agree with pro that this debate is about impacts. It's not about profit, or number of members. It's about impacts. Ultimately only one side can have the greater positive impact on their members.
Edeb8 remains, as always, (arguably) the best.
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro: "banned from DDO for generating poor conduct and content." Con: "it's relatively less attractive to these undesirable types." The site bugs are definitely an angle con could have excelled at by naming them. "And dozens of other things DDO doesn't have" I hate to encourage a Gish Gallop, but that list of dozens of things probably should have been a central point, rather than asserted that it exists. The Ads of the sexualized old man are really creepy, however the value for the owner(s) seems important. The percentages bit sounded great, but if thought through (as pro did) ended up making Edb8 seem less relevant. "which site delivers the net better utility" to me was a weak finish, since it all but asks for bias, while completely undermining the averages argument previously put forward (as much as I didn't care for that one, it was still your argument to stand behind). Overall it really sounds like Edb8 is rapidly becoming better, but is not there yet.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro presented that the benefits of DDO outweigh the benefits of Edb8. While con did present a few features about Edb8 that I was unaware of personally, pro did show that they weren't significant enough to be points of strong points of negation. He also showed that DDO is measurably better. As a note to both, it's really difficult to objectively judge things like helpfulness of the user base size or the user interactions. That's why I'm counting the measurable worth as being of higher weight than things like what it feels like or what minor features are there. Most of that is subjective opinion, and between my experiences on both, I definitely prefer DDO.
Vote Placed by BLAHthedebator 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-||-|
Reasons for voting decision: I will vote null first before adding my RFD in case I don't finish. RFD coming soon in comments.
Vote Placed by Ajabi 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: In essence my judgement is based on the definitive criteria presented, however it is noteworthy that the evaluation of the criteria is slightly subjective; I cannot be blamed for this, because this was the nature of the resolution. As far as "superior suitability" is concerned, I will judge the sites as a whole, and not just on their "debate experience". As Mikal points out this debate is about the sites as a whole. Now I do believe that edeb8 has some great gems, as larz points out its more user friendly, and allows a more intimate personalization; I still vote for debate.org because in the end ddo has a. a wider user base covering the better part of the world, b. on average more competitive debate, c. a more social environment. In conclusion as such sites are a place where people not only debate, but meet like minded individuals, form friendships etc. ddo is preferable to edeb8. That said I think in time edeb8 will go above and beyond ddo. Happy to clarify. :)
Vote Placed by Varrack 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued that DDO has many more members, more high quality debates, more activity happening on the site, and higher profitability. Con argued that Edeb8 has more features and higher quality debates as a percentage. Pro contested that features are minor and ultimately don't matter especially when there are few people to use them. Con acknowledged that DDO has more members/debates but argued that stats don't matter when it comes to why a site is better than the other. However, Con didn't seem to show why numbers don't matter and relied most of his argument on features that don't even matter when one considers the low activity of the site. Pro showed that a new site with 2 debates and 1 high quality debate isn't necessarily better than one with more debates/members. In the end, Pro's case was the one that held up, and it was shown by him that DDO is a better site by the means of more activity, history, and high quality debates, of which put Con in a dilemma.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: It is to my understanding that my vote was taken down, so I will try again. My reasoning for giving this for the variety of reasons Pro gave for his case, such as higher quality debates, active membership, and the types of debates DDO has. It doesn't matter if it is about the community, profitability, or quality. I did not think Con showed good refutations to Pro's points because they were unable to prove his case and explain why Pro's argument in favor of DDO were not as strong. His explanation to why DDO is better was, honestly, simply better, based on my reading of this debate. This is obviously more than enough to suffice for a good RFD.
Vote Placed by imabench 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Mikal hit the nail on the head when bringing up the painfully low activity rate on edeb8, which con could not dismiss or overcome. The type of members who wind up on edeb8 also was a substantial argument pro made that con could not overcome either. Con's arguments appeared to be centered around the idea that edeb8 is getting better, not that its better than DDO. He mentions a handful of meaningless gimmicks that edeb8 has that DDO does not, but the extra features fall far short of compensating for the low activity and low number of debates edeb8 has. Clear win for the pro.
Vote Placed by Kozu 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: see comments
Vote Placed by nzlockie 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Not having a objective criteria for "better", I was reliant on using subjective. In effect, the judges are now trying to convince ME which site would be better FOR ME. This is an annoying way to format a debate. It should have been: Better for Debate, or Better for Socialising, or Better at Cards - or something I can measure and contrast without its importance being based on my opinion. In the end, I was convinced by the fact that although many features were able to be imitated on DDO with work-arounds, Edeb8 did them better and had more of them. This includes debate AND social features. MANY of the features listed for Edeb8 which CAN'T be imitated were simply swept aside as not being important, with no justification for this. DDO scored with having more members, and being a profit generating site. These were both good points and strong. Popularity and Profitability. If these were cars, DDO would be a Toyota Corolla and Edeb8 would be a Lamborghini.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
|Who won the debate:||-|
Reasons for voting decision: Of course this is biased because I am on fvcking DDO, but in all seriousness I thought Mikal won. I will try to finish some of my RFD now but it won't be completed until later
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.