The Instigator
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
Double_R
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

New DDO members shouldn't be able to start debates right away.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 5 votes the winner is...
Double_R
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/23/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,288 times Debate No: 18013
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (16)
Votes (5)

 

F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Thanks to Double_R for agreeing to this debate and good luck.

Resolution:
The Falcon Plan which outlines the procedure that a new DDO member must follow before being able to instigate debates is better than the current DDO system which allows new members to instigate debates as soon as they join.

The Falcon Plan:
1) Upon entering DDO, new members will be able to view a read-only version of all debates and votes. The comments section and the forums will be open for them to participate in.

2) New members are encouraged to comment on existing debates, post forum topics, make friends and suggest topics that they want to debate on. They should provide RFDs in their debate comments. For the purposes of this debate, providing an RFD in the comments without actually voting will be known as a pseudovote. Pseudovotes can be counter-pseudovoted by established DDO members who must give a reason for doing so.

3) After providing 5 forum posts and 5 pseudovotes, they must read the DDO tutorial and orientation posted in forum and answer a short multiple choice quiz based on the orientation or tutorial.

4) None of their pseudovotes must have been counterpseudovoted and none of their forum posts must have been reported for misconduct or trolling. Trolling results in an immediate ban whereas being counterpseudovoted leads to the new member being three pseudovotes down.

5) If they pass the quiz, they can start their debates challenging their friends or anyone that they met on the forums that has agreed to debate with them.

6) After one completed, non-forfeited debate, the member now will have full access to the DDO site including instigating open challenges. They can also vote on debates. If they forfeit a debate, they must complete two more non-forfeited debates before they are allowed full access.


Definitions:

New DDO member: A member who has just joined DDO and has no debates at all.

Established DDO member: A member who has full access to all features of DDO.

Better: The overall effect to the new member in question, other members and the website as a whole must be considered.

Pseudovote: Providing an RFD in the comments section for each option. (Ex- Conduct to Con because.... Arguments to Pro because.... )


Rules:
Round 1: Pro lays out resolution, plan, and definition. Con accepts and clarifies.
Round 2: Pro shows why the resolution is correct. Con shows why it is incorrect.
Round 3: Anything goes
Round 4: Anything but no new arguments.

Double_R

Con

Thanks to F-16_Fighting_Falcon for this most interesting challenge. I accept and wish him the best of luck.
Debate Round No. 1
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Thanks to Double_R for his acceptance. I hope this will be a very entertaining debate. In my opening I will show the why the resolution is correct.

Resolution: The Falcon Plan which outlines the procedure that a new DDO member must follow before being able to instigate debates is better than the current DDO system which allows new members to instigate debates as soon as they join.


(A) Members better understand the world of DDO
The member can better understand the subtle nuances and unspoken etiquette about DDO. The more they learn about it, the more interesting it becomes. To an outsider, soccer or baseball may not seem very interesting or complicated. However, when they understand the game better, the finer points of the game and the different possible plays and tactics become more fascinating as the person learns more about them. The same is true for DDO. Reading debates made by other people and challenging themselves to critically analyze those debates engages newcomers enough that they can't wait to start. Newcomers can easily read and pseudovote on 5 debates in 2-3 days at which point they go through the tutorial and challenge someone they met in the forum or challenge a friendly person like rockylightning who probably added them as a friend the moment they entered the site.

(B) Knowing where to find help
New members can use the forum to ask for help. Sure, they can also do it under the current system, but many members just think that this is a debating site and are unaware of the help that the forums can be to them until much later. Under the new plan, because they are unable to start a debate (likely due to a message showing what they must do before starting a debate), they would know that they should pseudovote, or go to the forums, learn how to debate on DDO, and then debate.

(C) Better Debaters
This leads to informed, trained debaters who will be a more valuable addition to the site than the majority of new members who leave after just one debate discouraged with their loss. Currently 2766 out of the 5410 members or nearly half of all members (49%) only have one debate [1]. The primary reason would be that they are discouraged with their debate and leave the site. Only 1150 members or just above 20% have at least one win. This means that nearly 80% of members on this site never won a debate [2]. With the new system, not only would it increase the number of interested, motivated debaters, but it would reduce the number of people who have the wrong idea of the site and who give up easily and are likely to present poor arguments, forfeit their debates and never come back.

(D) Improved quality of debating
The debates on DDO will be of a higher quality because both members will be well acqainted with standard rules and etiquette. DDO is a site of intellectuals and intelligent and well-argued debates are more popular than debates written by novices who don't follow the standard rules. Granted, joke debates/rap debates may be popular too but these serve a specific purpose and are different than amateur debates instigated by novices who are unable to competently debate.

(E) Less forfiets
Members can be guaranteed that anyone they are debating is less likely to forfeit or post random incoherent rubbish than they would be under the current system. This is because these members have taken the effort to read at least 5 deabtes, analyzed them in their pseudovotes, posted 5 forum topics and passed a short tutorial. They are well aware of what they walking into. The kind of people who will become established members of DDO will be persistent people who are interested enough in the concept of online debating and DDO that they would not want to pack up and leave when they see an argument they cannot respond to. They will understand what the site is about and will want to pursue it. This creates less forfeits than the current system.



Note: IP addresses/phone numbers should continue to be checked, trolling must continue to be reported etc. I don't advocate making any changes to those aspects of DDO.

Sources
[1] http://www.debate.org...
[2] http://www.debate.org...

Double_R

Con

An important note for this debate is that as per our PM chat prior to this debate, we are debating whether new members on DDO should be allowed to instigate debates upon joining this site. We are not debating whether new members should be allowed to accept challenges, or any aspects of the voting system.


The Purpose of DDO


The resolution compares the current system which allows new members to instigate debates right away, to the “Falcon Plan” which is laid out above. Before we can debate which system is better we must first look at what the purpose of this website is:


Debate.org is an online debate website designed to provide an easy and free platform for people to challenge each other intellectually via debates and open forum communication.” (1)


To accept the Falcon Plan we must first accept that DDO should not be a website that is designed to be “an easy and free” platform for people to debate. Currently DDO is not a high traffic website. What Pro is proposing is to take a low traffic website that is currently free and easy, and turn it into a website that requires some sort of training before members can be allowed to do what they came here to do, which is debate.


The Falcon Plan is too Complicated


Some of the most attractive qualities about DDO are its visual appeal and user friendliness. This plan offers a number of new rules that would overcomplicate the website. How do you explain a pseudovote to a new member? How do we set up the options for “established members” to counter pseudovote? And most importantly how do we sell this plan to new members, especially the ones who are not interested in meeting a whole bunch of requirements before they can debate?


Member access should not be controlled by other users


While the Falcon Plan is intended as a way to allow some members to help others, what it ultimately comes down to is the fact that it will be the members who decide when another member is ready to debate. New members should be allowed access to the website as long as they follow the rules, not as long as other members agree with them. After all DDO is a website that thrives on disagreement. Some members will not agree with a new members pseudovote. How do we control abusive or unjustified counter pseudovotes? Do we put a counter-counter pseudovote system in place too? This would only lead to more problems making the system even more complicated.


This plan will not lead to better debaters


One of the basic ideas of this system is that it will help improve the quality of debaters on this site. This argument is false because it begins with the assumption that every member of this website joins with the desire to be a top debater, which is not the case. There are generally two different kinds of people who join this site: A) Those that want to debate a specific topic, and B) those who are interested in general debating and being a strong debater. Let’s consider how the Falcon Plan would affect these two groups:


A) Members who want to debate a specific topic are only interested in debating that topic. They are not interested in “jumping through hoops” and meeting a bunch of requirements before they can be allowed to do what they came here to do. This type of person has never debated and thus has no appreciation for debating. This will not develop until they have participated in a debate or two and start to understand that there is more to this then they first realized. If they are forced to go through this plan first they will likely quit before they even begin.


B) Those who are interested in debating in general will already do all of the things that this plan makes them do. People who are here because they are interested in debating have likely read other debates and are already getting the idea. They have an interest that will not fade simply because they lose. The most likely reason these members leave the site is because they feel outmatched. Debating is a skill that some people have naturally, or work very hard to be good at. Either way, it comes from within. The Falcon Plan, or any other plan can not change this.


Members should be able to choose for themselves when they are ready


The most troubling aspect of this is that members are forced to allow other members, number of forum posts, or test scores to decide when they are ready. Why should anyone else play a role in this decision? The best argument I can think of is to protect the quality of debates. This goes back to the question: What is the purpose of DDO? Is DDO a site for top level debaters only? What about 12 and 13 year olds who want to learn how to debate? I understand that many are concerned about controlling troll debates, but trolls are much more common when it comes to accepting debate challenges and in the forums and comment sections which is not what we are debating. The only solution to stopping them from instigating troll debates is to take away everyone else’s privileges, which is going way too far.


As far as forfeited debates, DDO does not show them in the home page so there is no need to be concerned about them in terms of quality of debates. As far as the nuisance of someone forfeiting on you, there is no way to stop or even control it. But when someone is forfeiting their own topic it is much less disruptive then when someone forfeits as a challenger.


Conclusion:


The Falcon Plan changes DDO from a site that is a free and easy platform for people to debate, to an established member’s only website that will wind up deterring many potentially good debaters from joining. While the overall quality of debates may increase this will only be because many of the novice debaters will either decide not to bother or be scared away by the level one must achieve just to be part of the group. It will not make serious debaters any better because they are already doing all of the things that the Falcon Plan makes them do.


Debate Round No. 2
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

1) DDO's purpose

Con argues that the Falcon Plan will turn DDO from an "easy and free" site to one that requires training. Firstly, the Falcon Plan will in no way change DDO into a paid site. My opponent lumps "free" and "easy" together as if they were synonyms and implies, though never explicitly states, that the Falcon plan is not free or easy. I must say, it will most certainly be free and I will now show why it will also be easy.

There are only 3 things that a new member needs to do before starting a debate: 5 pseudovotes, 5 forum posts, and a short quiz from the orientation. Once they finish that debate, they can debate with anybody they want.

Everything else mentioned in the Falcon plan is merely a contigency plan for what happens when people abuse their rights. It can be thought of as a terms of service which could be added to DDO's terms of service should the plan be implemented. The actual process is quite straightforward. Unless a member intends to forfeit debates, troll in the forums or use the pseudovotes to votebomb debates, they can easily be an established member of DDO.

The very few requirements that educate new members about the site will enhance the quality of DDO where members can truly challenge each other intellectually which is what the site is about.


2) Too Complicated
(i) Explain a pseudovote to a new member?
Ans: Pseudovote: Provide a Reason For Decision in the comments section for each option in the voting category such as why Pro should get arguments or Con should get conduct. For help, refer to the DDO voting guidelines.

(ii) How “established members” counter pseudovote?
Ans: The same way we currently countervotebomb.

(iii)How do we sell this plan to new members not interested in meeting a whole bunch of requirements before they can debate?
Ans: There are only three requirements before you can debate which would take 2-3 days at most or 1 day if on the weekend. We can sell this plan to show that DDO is website for intellectuals and not a youtube comments section. New members will see the difference more clearly than under the current system and would want to join. They would know that this is a site to challenge themselves intellectually and not a site where they can post rubbish and get away with it. Under the Falcon Plan, the differences will be far more obvious than they are now.

Just because something is more complicated doesn't necessarily mean that it is not good or beneficial. Must high school debates such as the Lincoln-Douglas, and public forum debates be simplified to "increase traffic" to the debates? The answer is no, as the traffic is there because they respect the structure and format and the finer nuances and subtleties of these debates and want to participate.


3) Member access

Q: How do we control abusive or unjustified counter pseudovotes?
Ans: How do we control abusive votebombs? DDO is site of legitimate, intelligent members and the members will find a fair system to put in place. For example, in the current system, only members vote, not the moderators. Yet, the vast majority of debates are voted fairly. Yes, members who abusively counter-psedovote must be reported to the moderators or blocked.

Con again says that three straightforward requirements with solid contingency plans are "too complicated". However, the burden is on Con to prove that just because something is complicated necessarily makes it undesirable. Chess is a complicated game. Should it be simplified?


4) Better debaters

Con classifies poeple into two groups: (a) Specific topic and (b) Debating in general. I introduce a third group (c) Members who stumbled upon this site from an assignment for their class and became engaged with the intelligent debating and the professionalism on the site.

(a) The Falcon plan will make them better debaters as reading and analyzing debates will help them understand how to organize their thoughts coherently on paper, and the standards of professionalism and respect expected on DDO.

(b) Con argues that debating is a skill that comes from within, but that is not necessarily true. Debating is a skill that can be learned. Toastmasters is a well-respected international organization which teaches debate among other things [3].

(c) The Falcon plan is best suited for this group. They want a place where they can learn how to debate in the shortest possible amount of time, and then put their skills to the test.

It is not just the member in question that stands to benefit but also other members who can expect educated debates from people who already know all the standard rules and can compete with them effectively because they have experience analyzing deabtes.


5) Members should choose when they are ready

Q: Is DDO a site for top level debaters only?
Ans: No. How is this even relevant? The Falcon Plan never claims that DDO is exclusively for "top level" debaters.

Q: What about 12 and 13 year olds who want to learn how to debate?
Ans: What part of the Falcon plan is stopping them from learning how to debate? It actually helps people who want to learn how to debate by giving them a structure to follow before they can move on to the next level. This is similar to a video game in which you must first earn credits or pass levels before you can unlock the higher levels. Should all levels in a video game be unlocked as soon as it is started? This takes away the fun factor and the sense of achievement that comes from moving through the levels.

Just because forfeited debates don't show up on the home page doesn't mean that they aren't there. The current system "hides" the problem whereas the Falcon Plan addresses the root of the problem.


Conclusion

My opponent's entire argument seems to be that the Falcon Plan is too complicated but my opponent never really defends the idea that being complicated is a bad thing. High school debate such as the LD, public forum, and policy debates have complicated structures. Must they be simplified?


Sources
[1] http://bit.ly...
[2] http://bit.ly...
Double_R

Con

Thanks to Pro for providing answers to some of my questions, unfortunately many of the answers only lead to more questions, many of which are too complicated to be discussed here. That is what happens when trying to implement new systems, only after issues occur will they be realized and thus corrected.


Pros arguments sound convincing because he is trying to have it both ways. He claims that the system is not complicated at all, yet claims that it will increase the quality of debates on this site. To put forward a simple plan to solve a problem, is to imply that the problem itself is simple. Increasing the quality of debates on DDO is not a simple problem. I think the moderators understand this quite clearly and the members should as well. I will have more on this.


1. DDO’s Purpose


Pro refutes my “free and easy” claim by first stating that the website will not cost anything. Money is not the only factor in something being free. It also factors how much one must give or personally invest to enjoy the rewards. The Falcon Plan clearly adds to this. But I suppose this argument is more suited for the “easy” portion of it. Either way this goes right back to my first argument, if it is so easy how will it make any significant difference?


Pro states that his “few” requirements will enhance the quality of DDO by educating new members about the site. However pseudovotes will not educate them about anything unless they are forced to read the debate in its entirety and provide an informed RFD. Forum posts will not teach them anything unless they are forced to provide a contributive comment, and a quiz will not teach them anything unless it is informative and therefore not easy to pass. The bottom line here is that it will either be easy, or effective, it will not be both.


So we go back to the purpose of DDO. If this plan is free and easy it will barely affect anything. If it is not free and easy then it goes against the purpose of this site. Either way the plan should not be implemented.


2. Too complicated


(i) Pro provides his explanation of a pseudovote to a new member implying that it is simple. The issue is that while it may be easy for myself and the readers here to understand, a new member will not understand it. Here is the definition:


“Pseudovote: Provide a Reason For Decision in the comments section for each option in the voting category such as why Pro should get arguments or Con should get conduct. For help, refer to the DDO voting guidelines.”


The reason we can all understand this definition is because we have all participated in debates and have learned the lingo. New members will not understand what any of the underlined portions mean. They may not be hard to understand but the whole point of the “too complicated” argument is that it is a turnoff for new members, in addition to placing an additional burden on existing members.


Pro states that more complicated does not mean it is not beneficial. Indeed it does not. First of all this comment contradicts his assertion that his plan it is not complicated. Second, the issue is not weather it is complicated but weather it should be. Since this website is designed to be free and easy, it should not be complicated.


3. Member Access


Pro states that we control abusive pseudovotes the same way we control votebombs. There are two issues with this answer. First, most of us know what it is like to lose a debate based on what we see as a votebomb. They do happen. It is one thing to lose a debate because of one, but being denied or delayed access to a website after putting in the necessary effort is very different and much worse.


Second, how many of us will honestly pay attention to pseudovotes? Currently there is a major issue with voting on DDO. If people don’t vote on debates there is no reason to think people will pay attention to a new member’s pseudovote about that debate. This will make counter pseudovotes far less common then counter votebombs.


4. Better Debaters


Pro begins by introducing a third group of people who join this site. The third group is the same as the second group: B) people who join the site because they are interested in debating in general.


A) Pro states that the plan will make people who are only came here to debate specific topics better debaters by forcing them to go through the requirements. Again, if they are not interested in going through the requirements they will probably not stick around for them.


But even if they do stick around they will not take the requirements any more seriously then they would have taken this site anyway. This reminds me of the “clean your room” analogy. If a parent has to force a child to clean their room they will only clean what they can get away with. If they can just shove everything under the bed or the closet they will do that. By the same token, if a new debater does not want to take these requirements seriously they will only put in the effort needed to get past them. You can not make somebody want to be a better debater, which is required for this to improve the current system.


B) Pro states that debating is a skill that can be learned. Yes it is. But those who want to learn will do that on their own, they do not need the Falcon Plan to force them to. That desire to work hard is what comes from within, as I stated clearly in Round 2.


5) Members should choose when they are ready


Almost out of space so I will only address the forfeit point. Pro states that this Plan addresses the root of the problem. Many debaters forfeit because they are busy and can not find the time to post an argument. The Falcon Plan does not address this reason. When it comes to new members forfeiting their own debates I ask: why is this such a big issue? If the purpose of the plan is to improve quality of debates then why are we concerned about debates that do not even show up? I understand the concern about new members forfeiting someone else’s debate but that is not what we are discussing.

Debate Round No. 3
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

I thank Double_R for this fantastic debate. Con doesn't address some of my arguments so I will summarize them here.


OPENING ARGUMENTS

A) Members better understand DDO

Members will understand more about the rules and etiquette of DDO before they make mistakes. Reading through debates helps them understand how a formal debate must be written and the respect that they need to have for their opponent, while when they read the orientation, they will make the connections in their mind, as to how the orientation material had applied to debates that they read.

All this, they can do without instigating debates and using DDO as an experimental platform thereby not cheating another member off a good debate which would happen if new members instigate debates right away and have no clue as to how to finish the debate competently.


B) Finding Help

Not being able to instigate debates directs the new members to the part of the site that they can immediately participate in. Here, they will get the help they need to start debating and be a contributing member of this site. They will know exactly what to do to start, learn how to debate and start debating with full understanding of how DDO works and the conduct to be observed such as no forfeiting, professionalism etc.


C) Reduces forfeits

Con doesn't really address the problem of forfeits. Instead he excuses this poor conduct as "not having enough time" and defends the rights of new members to forfeit on "their own debates". I don't understand how it is fair to the member who accepts the debate or completes it halfway through to have their opponent forfeit on them even if it is the forfeiters "own debate". Once a debate is accepted, it becomes both the member's debate.

The Falcon Plan addresses the root of the problem by only allowing members who are not likely to forfeit, to instigate debates. If the members spent time reading and analyzing debates, and read through the orientation, they have the time and the interest to post arguments. The current system uses a band-aid solution by hiding the forfeited debates.

It is also ironic that Con defends the rights of forfeiters when this debate only exists because Double_R's previous opponent had instigated a debate on the same topic and then forfeited on him halfway through, and I PM'd him asking to debate the same topic. Forfeited debates such as that one are littered across the site.



REBUTTALS

1) DDO purpose

The Falcon Plan upholds the purpose of DDO by providing a site where people provide intelligent arguments and expect their opponent to conform to the rules of the site. DDO is different from a youtube comments section which is full of swearwords and members who leave after posting a load of rubbish. The Falcon Plan makes this difference even more clear when it only allows members to instigate debates who have shown a commitment to learn what the site is about.

The Falcon Plan will actually make it easier for members to engage in an intelligent discussion as they can be sure that everyone who posted in the challenge section has read a few debates and knows the standard debating rules of DDO, and alleviates their fear that a new member will forfeit on them halfway through.


2) Better Debaters & Debates

The Falcon plan will lead to better debaters since everyone who instigates a debate will have already seen first hand how debates are done and have learned from the orientation how to deabte on DDO. Some of the members who came here to only debate a specific topic will want to learn. Others will be uninterested in learning how to debate, and put up poor quality debates on the site.

Nearly 50% of members on this site have only one debate and nearly 80% of members never won a debate. DDO has become a place where a few hundred people do most of the debating and the vast majority quit after losing their first debates because they did not have an opportunity to gain the skills that they should before instigating a debate.

The ones that leave because they don't want to read other people's debates or learn about DDO are no loss because they show that they don't take the site seriously and would have forfeited and left anyways.


3) Member access

Con says that as long as members follow the rules, they should access the site. The Falcon Plan agrees with this. As long as members follow the 3 steps, they will have access to the site. Any established member abusing their privileges will be reported to the moderators. This is no different from the current system where people can votebomb or plagiarize but doing so will get them reported.


4) Complicated

The Falcon Plan is more complicated when compared to the current DDO system but it is not "too complicated". There are a few additional rules that members must follow before instigating debates and these rules help not only the member, but other members and the site as a whole.

My opponent tries to convince you that new members will not understand words like "Pro", "Con" or "comments section". I was a new member once, and so was my opponent. It doesn't take more than 10 seconds to figure out what those words mean. a link to the Voting Guidelines page explains everything in more detail. The words "Pro", "Con" and "comments" are clearly written in big, bold letters and new members will not find them confusing.



CONCLUSION

My opponent's only issue with the Falcon Plan seems to be that it is complicated. My opponent conceded that being complicated is not necessarily a bad thing. Baseball, chess, and LD style high school debating are complicated. They should not be simplified. My analogy with multi-level video games holds true as well.

The Falcon Plan will increase the number of intelligent arguments on the site, decrease forfeits and poor quality debates and actually make it easier for members to engage in an intellectual discussion without fear of forfeits. While there may be further questions, these must be answered as opposed to using the current system because we are afraid of the unknown.
Double_R

Con

In this last round Pro provides many refutations to my arguments that will need to be addressed. I will refute them using the same concepts I have already argued for in this debate.


A) Members better understand DDO


I never did respond to this argument because I agree with it. In fact it is quite obvious that if every member goes through this plan there will be a better overall understanding of DDO. However, the question is whether we should allow new members to choose how well they wish to understand DDO, or force them to understand it by not allowing them to participate in any meaningful way until they meet all of the requirements.


Pro states that new members using DDO as an “experimental platform” cheats members out of a good debate. How is a member being cheated out of a good debate when it was their opponent who came up with the resolution? You can not cheat somebody out of someone else’s idea.


B) Finding Help


Mostly the same point as above


C) Reduces Forfeits


Pro states that I use the “not having enough time” argument to excuse poor conduct in forfeiting. This would be a great call out if it was actually my argument. I do not excuse forfeits. I simply point out that the fact that people forfeit because they have other matters in their personal lives to attend to. This will not be changed by The Falcon Plan, or any other plan unless Pro would like to set up a new plan to have DDO members show up at debater’s houses.


Pro points out how a forfeit is a forfeit no matter who starts it and uses my previous debate on this topic as an example. I was disappointed when my opponent forfeited that debate but again, I would have never even conceived of the topic let alone had the opportunity to debate it, if it were not for my opponent instigating the challenge.


Pros case on this seems to be that if new members are going to forfeit then they should not be allowed to instigate a debate in the first place. So what about all of the fresh ideas they can bring? Pro states how ironic it is that I “defend” new members forfeiting when this very topic was forfeited in my debate. I find it even more ironic that Pro seems to have conceived of the very topic we are debating right now, from a new member who came up with this resolution then forfeited and apparently left the site.


1. DDO’s Purpose


I find it interesting that Pro completely disregarded my argument about this, which is arguably the most important aspect of this debate. I stated throughout that DDO is a website designed to be a “free and easy” platform for people to challenge each other intellectually. Instead Pro responds in the last round by stating that the Falcon Plan provides “a site where people provide intelligent arguments and expect their opponent to conform to the rules of the site”. What happened to free and easy? Pro never addressed one of the main points about this debate, which is the fact that his plan goes against what this web site was intended for. His only hint at a rebuttal to this fact was his assertion that his plan is not complicated, which he has contradicted himself on several times.


2. Better Debaters


Pro continues to assert that his plan will lead to better debaters. His only support for this is his “new members will be more educated” argument that I have already refuted. As I stated before; being a good debater is not someone who simply knows the rules. It is someone who is naturally gifted, or who has the desire to work hard to be good. The Falcon Plan has no effect on either of these, therefore it will not make debaters any better. All it will do is eliminate new members who do not have that desire right away. Yet who is to say that these members will not develop that desire after they participate in a few debates and begin to understand what debating is about?


3. Member Access


Pros statements here are completely inconsistent with his previous arguments.


“As long as members follow the 3 steps, they will have access to the site”


Yet in the rules to this plan he states that before they can begin…


"None of their pseudovotes must have been counterpseudovoted and none of their forum posts must have been reported for misconduct or trolling”


Since counterpseudovotes and misconduct reporting is done by members, it will clearly be the members who decide who will be granted access to DDO. Pro also states:


“Any established member abusing their privileges will be reported to the moderators.”


How can Pro guarantee this? And even if they are reported, there is no way for us to be assured that the moderators will actively address the necessary issues to prevent new members from being unjustifiably delayed access to DDO. This is a major issue that Pro can not address.


4. Too Complicated


Pro completely misses my argument here. His only rebuttal is to say that the plan is not “too complicated”. Yes, people can learn this stuff quickly. But why would most new members want to? Why would anyone want to invest their time earning a privilege to something that they do not even know if they will enjoy? The argument I made here is that this will be a turn off to all new members because they are not being given that choice. This is clearly not beneficial to DDO, yet Pro believes it is. The voters will have to decide that one.


Conclusion


New members instigating debates and posting weak arguments or forfeiting may be annoying but it does not cheat anyone out of anything. I can understand where Pro is coming from with this plan but it will not have the results he claims. There are 2 things that make a good debater and this plan does not affect either of them. Educating new members is a great idea but it will not make them any better unless it is their choice.


The Falcon Plan has a cool name, but the flaws of the current system are far more acceptable then what has been introduced.

Debate Round No. 4
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
I'd like someone to please counter massdebator's votebomb despite it being in my favor.
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
Sent to you via message.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
@YYW's vote: sure, why don't you explain in more detail, I'd love to hear your feedback.
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
I came to this site because I wanted to argue with 9/11 conspiracy theorists. I had no interest in general debating and was shocked to see that some people would spend hours here debating such miniscule topics. Now look at me. If I had to jump through hoops I probably wouldn't still be here either. In fact the phone check thing was almost enough to turn me away.
Posted by seraine 5 years ago
seraine
I came to this site to debate Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and I probably wouldn't have bothered joining if I had to jump through a bunch of hoops.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
I'd like to thank Double_R too for this very competitive debate. Hopefully, we did justice to an interesting topic.
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
I forgot to add that I wanted to thank Falcon for a good debate. Not just saying, it certainly was interesting.
Posted by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
RR is right, I think this would highly discourage all but the most persistent. And with any site that starts to lean to elitism eventually shrivels up and dies.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Dammit!! Google Chrome has crashed just when I had finished writing my argument and was about to click submit.
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
Now Helium-Flash, that's not really fair. He had an idea he felt was a good one and wanted to put it to the test. There is nothing wrong with that. He challenged me because he knew I disagreed and he felt that I would be a worthy challenger (or maybe I am just being full of myself). There are many issues with this site, but finding solutions that solve more problems then they create is the challenge.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by seraine 5 years ago
seraine
F-16_Fighting_FalconDouble_RTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter v-bomb on massdebater.
Vote Placed by MassDebator255 5 years ago
MassDebator255
F-16_Fighting_FalconDouble_RTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Double_R,,,,, youve been CROSSED!!!
Vote Placed by YYW 5 years ago
YYW
F-16_Fighting_FalconDouble_RTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Very interesting debate, and one of those rare occasions where someone actually changed my mind. Con's arguments overwhelmed Pro's contentions because Con noted the consequences of the "Falcon plan" and demonstrated how they were not congruent with the actual purpose of debate.org. If either side wishes to further discuss my RFD in detail, feel free to message me or post in the comment's section.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
F-16_Fighting_FalconDouble_RTied
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: Interesting debate, and I thought it was close. I ended up going with Con on the basis of the "two complicated" argument. The requirements posed are not onerous, but the added ask of having to understand what they are would deter many people. Still, the site is for "intelligent" debate, not for any debate, so there's an argument for upping the intelligence requirement
Vote Placed by 000ike 5 years ago
000ike
F-16_Fighting_FalconDouble_RTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Stronger points from Con. With Con's establishment of the purpose of DDO, I didn't feel like Pro adequately explained how the Falcon Plan would still be "free and easy." Good topic however.