The Instigator
Josh_b
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Debate.com should have a specified format

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/3/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 998 times Debate No: 41637
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

Josh_b

Pro

Debate.com should have a specified debating format. Just saying watch this video and have it carries no structure at all. People, cry, and moan about what ever they want, however they want in every comment forum on the internet. Take youtube for example, people just argue about things for no reason, I once saw an argument on a children's video over same sex marriage. I believe that the debate is appropriate but it has nothing to do with the video it was commenting on, so it is inappropriate but there is nothing to stop it.

Debates often start out with one person making a claim-- that's good. But, they go on with the other person saying "You're wrong," and the first person saying, "I'm Right," then the second person saying "You're wrong," again and it's a vicious cycle. Debate.com does make a step toward keeping order by limiting the debate rounds because debates inevitably end with character attacks. Even here on debate.com there are character attacks. Statements like "well my opponent refuses to comment on my comment that I made two turns ago, so my comment must be the legitimacy for truth," do nothing to further the debate except attack the character of the other person.

More often than not, the first round of almost every debate I've read begins with rules over what kind of comments are expected in the following rounds. And the rebuttal to that round is often acceptance to debate or confusion over what the rules are supposed to mean. This is cumbersome both in starting a debate and in following a debate.
A format for refutation and rebuttal rounds should be enacted as part of the debate starting process. There can still be an open format, and the opinion section is great soap boxing. But when it comes to debating predefined terms over the process should be stated up front. Hence the reason for the first round of many debates being a statement of rules.
Ore_Ele

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this debate. I will bring up my arguments now.

1) There is an issue when debates have no format. When there are no set rules, things may get out of hand and go off topic. However, there are many different types of formats and rule structures that people enjoy using. By having no specified format allows the flexibility for members to set their own format. This creates a greater experience for a wider range of users, and is ultimately better.

2) There has not been a single case on Debate.com where a lack of format has even been an issue. While there may have been plenty on Debate.org, there have been none on Debate.com. Also, lets all take a moment to notice that no format was established by my opponent. Thus leaving this debate open to a wide verity of diversionary tactics.

Speaking of which...

3) It was about 19 months ago that Innomen (president of DDO at the time) attempted to implement something similar. The idea was pitched to Juggle and they accepted and moved forward with the idea. It was to create a concrete format set for debates. To maintain the freedom and flexibility, Innomen and Juggle created... the Opinion and Polls section.
Debate Round No. 1
Josh_b

Pro

Being that debate.com is an advertisement page, and the creators of debate.org didn't purchase it to redirect traffic to thier website, I will extend my argument to dabate.org.
I see you are a very keen debator. But you seem to be more focued on word play than actually debating.

all it takes to have a set format is a dropbox on the debate starting page. There is obviously in the voting structure for debate.org a line to vote for which debator has the better conduct. How can one conduct be better than another if there is no defining of conduct. Cursing and name calling is a reportable offence. so

The first round is for acceptance. Why? Don't you have to push a button for acceptance? Isn't that enough?

I'm all about flexibility. There can be more than one style and an option to use your own style if you care to. I don't like refuting in the first round. If there is going to be a debate, it should include adequate evidence from both sides so that readers have a chance to come to thier own conclusions before one debator starts attacking the other person's ideas. I think this is the part where most people talk about burdon of proof.

I've already refuted the oppion section and polls section as an adequate measure for creating a specified format. Speaking of the oppinion and polls section. I was on yesterday and saw a particulary interesting comment posted and I decided that I wanted to debate on that topic. It took me to the start a debate screen. but none the topic of the debate didn't carry over. When you click challenge on the opinion section, don't you think the topic of the opinion is enough to be the topic of the debate? If I want to debate a specific person for some other reason, I'll go to thier page and challenge them, or change the topic of the debate.

People are stupid, they say dot com after everything. I wonder what the hits are on debate.com. It has a worse format than this one. But I should still purchase that website and sell it to the creator of this one.
Ore_Ele

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. As this is the last round, I will try to not introduce any new material, unless it is directly addressing new material my opponent just brought up. This is one of the down sides of a 2 round debate.

1) No set format allows greater customization.

My opponent has not refuted this and actually supported it. He said "There can be more than one style and an option to use your own style if you care to. I don't like refuting in the first round." When one talks about a "specified" format, they are talking about a singular format, not a series of options of formats, that would be an "array" of formats (there are a ton of other synonyms as well). Pro uses the example of "first round for acceptance." I will not go into why I favor doing first round for acceptance, but it shows the importance of not having a single specified format, so that those that want it can have it and those that don't want it, don't have to.

2) Debate.com

My opponent has just moved the goal posts by changing the resolution (in the final round, at that) from debate.com to debate.org. Switching to an entirely different website. However, I firmly believe that all my points hold for debate.org just as well, if not even better than debate.com

3) Polls and Opinions

My opponent said that he already refuted those, however he never addressed them at all. They still show the great risk involved with trying to force a single option and what will necessarily happen as a result. Lest we forget!

Thank you,
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
"But I should still purchase that website and sell it to the creator of this one"

Debate.org was debate.com years ago. I like the ring of DDO, though its particularly because I have grown used to it. I think .org sounds more professional anyway.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
"But I should still purchase that website and sell it to the creator of this one"

Debate.org was debate.com years ago. I like the ring of DDO, though its particularly because I have grown used to it. I think .org sounds more professional anyway.
Posted by Josh_b 3 years ago
Josh_b
why you accept challenge and not debate?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Yraelz 3 years ago
Yraelz
Josh_bOre_EleTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This resolution was super winnable for pro. Debate.org already has a specified format, all he had to do was argue that rounds should exist. Or that voting should happen after a determined time period. As it stands the semantic argument is mildly damning. But even if I give Pro the benefit of the doubt, Ore_Ele just wins flexibility. I think those arguments should have been flushed out more, but that's alright.
Vote Placed by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
Josh_bOre_EleTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: While I can see spinning knowledge lf a true intention as semantics, I cannot possibly fathom how the pro couldn't looked up at the logo for verification of the url. That and his whole argument specified debates made non reputable members, and not the better ones. Also it is impossible to expect adherence to a specific format. Ore ele summed it up well enough.
Vote Placed by yay842 3 years ago
yay842
Josh_bOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: As Pro did not refute Con and also supported Con. Pro changed topic of debate which was from debate.com to debate.org which strayed off the course of what was to be originally argued. This also changes conduct for going off topic.