The Instigator
tvellalott
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
airmax1227
Con (against)
Winning
40 Points

Presidential Debate 2012: Airmax1227 versus tvellalott

Do you like this debate?NoYes+16
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 11 votes the winner is...
airmax1227
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/14/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,454 times Debate No: 23606
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (9)
Votes (11)

 

tvellalott

Pro

This will be the official Presidential debate between myself and one of my opponents, Airmax1227.

EXTENDED RESOLUTION
I will be arguing: "Assuming tvellalott won the election, he would make a superior President to Airmax1227"

My opponent will be arguing "Assuming Airmax1227 won the election, he would make a superior President to tvellalott"

BURDEN OF PROOF
We each have the burden of proof of proving our respective resolutions.

ROUND STRUCTURE AND RULES
First round is only for definitions and acceptance.
The second round will consist entirely of arguments. No rebuttals from my opponent as this gives him the advantage.
The third round will allow new arguments and also rebuttals from both sides in response to any arguments previously made.
The fourth round will be only for rebuttals and conclusions; NO new arguments are to be introduced.

We both argee to avoid using semantics or trickery in our arguments and/or rebuttals.
Any forfeit will cause immediate loss of conduct points, except in the case of an equal number of forfeits. Biased RFD's can (AND WILL) be disputed so voters are encouraged to give detailed explanations for their point allocation.
We both agree that it is unfair for our VPs to vote and thus Thaddeus and innomen should not vote at all, though leaving RFD with no point allocation is allowed.

Good luck to my opponent. If you object to anything, please let me know in the comments before you accept the challenge so I can edit this debate accordingly.
airmax1227

Con

I accept. Good luck to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 1
tvellalott

Pro

OPENING

Hello dearest DDO and welcome to this official presidential debate for this upcoming election. I promise it will be highly informative and downright spectacular or your money back, guaranteed!
It will be my duty to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that I am the superior Presidential candidate and that you, dear reader, should vote for me!

Let’s begin.


ARGUMENTS

“The innomen factor”
Let’s not kid ourselves. The fact airmax1227 has innomen as his VP is pretty damn persuasive; given the excellent job innomen has done over the past 12 months+.
If innomen is supporting Airmax1227, what chance do I have?

Let me give you a quote directly from innomen regarding this. I confirmed with him whether or not I could use this quote and he was happy to allow it… (For the record, this conversation happened AFTER I posted the "Meet the candidate: tvellalott" topic.)

ME: "I need to ask your permission (and a favour really) on something.

In my debate against Airmax, I want to make it fairly clear that by running as his VP, you're not (as I originally thought) acting in aggression towards me and if I won, you are certainly going to at least work with me and also that you're very open minded about me becoming a moderator.

I'd like a direct quote if possible. :)"

INNOMEN: "Of course TV, there has never been anything that hasn’t been an ad hominem against you, and I know that I can work with you in any situation. Should you win the election, I would give you every bit of cooperation that I would give airmax, in some ways perhaps more.

innomen has also been giving me examples of some of the reports he deals with and asking me how I would deal with them. So far, almost every solution/action I’ve suggested has been in line with how he would have dealt with them himself.

So, as you can see the fact that innomen is running as airmax1227’s VP alone is not a good reason to vote for him.

“Platform comparison”
Site Features:
We’re both dedicated to improving the site in the same ways and accept the limitations that even a moderator has in bringing about changes. Not much difference here.

Juggle:
Again, we’re both dedicated to further improving the relationship between President and Juggle that innomen has built. Not much difference here either.

Banning:
We defer here a quite a bit I think, though I could be misinterpreting my opponent’s position. I apologise in advance if that’s the case…
From the Airmax1227/innomen platform: “In nearly all cases, these issues will be brought up publicly and the opinions of the membership will be sought after and valued”

I’m fairly certain this would dramatically slow down the process of dealing with reports. Based on what I’ve seen in the 10 or so reports innomen has shown me, most issues are either highly trivial or clear-cut. In the case of trivial reports, they would be noted but mostly ignored. In clear-cut cases I would simply ban/remove content without consulting the community. I would only bring issues of real contention to the community. Most issues can simply be left to the moderators.

Modding:
Our position here is almost identical. I too would lean on the side of freedom of speech over censorship but there is obviously some kind of standard here; this isn’t /b/. Let me give an example; a new member made this debate: “All black babies born in the U.S. on May 15 2012 should be sentenced to death”.
Now the content (it’s been removed by innomen already, sorry) was completely ridiculous and obvious trolling. I personally don’t think any of our regular members would have seen it as really offensive simply because it was so stupid and we’re pretty used to stupid people dropping in.

The debate was indeed worthy of removal (a number of people reported it) but the Instigator shouldn’t be outright banned. Instead a single warning should be given, explaining that we have a pretty low standard of what constitutes a legitimate debate topic here but that was definitely below it.

Mod issues:
Unlike my opponent I am running for President to become a moderator. Never before has the position had the relevance that innomen has given to it and I want to continue to secure that relevance. While I am more than aware that becoming President doesn’t equate to becoming a Moderator, I plan on using my election victory as evidence of community support for my becoming a moderator alongside innomen.

“Personal comparison”
Experience:
My credentials here speak for themselves. I don’t think many other people have been involved in the Presidency in the way I have. I have been heavily involved in the previous three elections and as such I’m intimately knowledgeable about DDO politics. I’ve seen and learnt from innomen’s experience and mistakes during the past six months first hand; I don’t need to be mentored. I am ready to work alongside him as well as independently.

Honesty and Fun:
I have always been completely honest about my character flaws and the limitations of this office. I have also tried to make this election a bit of a circus without hurting the feelings (too seriously anyway, amirite?) of any of our respected members. I can certainly be serious if the situation calls for it, but I’d rather be light-hearted and have fun. Perhaps I should have simply focused on my platform and pleasing everyone?


CONCLUSION

For this first round, I feel I have sufficiently shown that there is no real reason to vote for Airmax1227. Despite my abrasive “Meet the candidate” thread, the negative feedback was mainly about my criticism of some of innomen's methods (which I stand by) and the ‘imabench’ incident.

So the question is; do you want a President who is fearlessly open about his objections to even the most revered members of our community? One who plans on seizing the most the Presidency has to offer?

If you do, vote for me in this debate and in the upcoming election.

Thank you.
airmax1227

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate. This will give the voters an opportunity to see what separates us as candidates as well as what each of us could bring to the position.

I do not know my opponent very well as I have not spoken much with him, but from what I hear about him he is a decent person that is a lot of fun. So I look forward to this debate, and hope that it will clarify who each of us are, and our opinions on various things as they relate to the site.

In this round I simply want to reiterate what many members may already know, whether because I have spoken to them personally, or because they have read my announcement and/or platform threads.

Professionalism/Personality

I am not the type of person to engage in site drama, flame wars and other unproductive issues, though I am well aware when they occur and often am talking to people behind the scenes to resolve them if it is appropriate. Generally, I simply want to do the occasional debate, contribute to the forums when I feel I can offer something, and talk to various friends in PMs. Even though this may not seem like a lot, I probably average at least 3-4 hours a day logged into the site with that number increasing significantly lately.

This is something that I feel most recognize about my personality and why many members have contacted me saying that they are excited to see I have agreed to run for the presidency.

While having Innomen as my VP carries a lot of weight, and being in his shadow is something I considered before making my announcement, the voters are ultimately voting for me; someone who they recognize as a mature and competent individual that cares about the site and wants to see what is done is in the best interests of everyone and the site itself.

I don't have any cronies, am not a part of any cliques, and as far as I know don't have any enemies. I have no intention of simply surrounding myself with those I agree with, or that simply agree with me. I want to work with everyone who is interested in seeing this site succeed, and I know that is how I will be capable of having a productive and successful administration.

I recognize that the presidency is a service position dedicated to the wishes of the site community. My personality consisting of being an amicable, mature and professional person, as well as being warm towards others, makes it easy for me to be in regular contact with members and develop genuine relationships.

I am best suited to this position because I would be the most willing and able to work with people who are different from me if it means good things for the site overall. My record on the site speaks for itself. From what I know, I've caused no problems for anyone here and my earnest goal is to continue that tradition.

Success is dependent on Juggle. I have the skills, career experience and personality which would behoove a DDO President the most in a relationship with Juggle. I work as a mediator between both individuals and companies in the work I do everyday.

The Juggle offices also happen to be a 6-hour drive from my front door, something that may not be all that significant, but may prove to ultimately be quite useful. (Zip codes 53202 to 62226) If it were ever necessary to correspond with Juggle in person, this would be a possibility if I were DDO president.

I live in the United States, in the Midwest, in US Central standard time. Not all that significant, but my peak times of usage of the site happens to coincide with the times most other users are also using the site.

I will leave it at that for this round.

I would once again like to thank my opponent, and I look forward to seeing his next round.
Debate Round No. 2
tvellalott

Pro

I am conceding this debate to Airmax1227.
I wish him all the best in his campaign.

http://www.debate.org...
airmax1227

Con

I wish my opponent well in all his future endeavors. While he would have made a formidable opponent, his decision to drop out is certainly understandable.
Debate Round No. 3
Debate Round No. 4
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Tetraneutrons 4 years ago
Tetraneutrons
I'm pretty new here, so I realize I don't have a lot of say.

That being said, has it ever been considered having some kind of cross examination round option in debates for points of clarification?
Posted by tvellalott 4 years ago
tvellalott
You're next jimtimmy.
Posted by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
I;ll be keeping up on this
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 4 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
I'll definitely be interested in seeing how a presidential debate unfolds. Haven't seen one of those before which is ironic considering this is a debate site.
Posted by Oryus 4 years ago
Oryus
@ Zaradi

huh?

"Biased RFD's can (AND WILL) be disputed so voters are encouraged to give detailed explanations for their point allocation."
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
I'm assuming that since this is entirely subjective belief wise, this is why TV stated that RFDs aren't necessarily required. I will defientely be paying attention to this one.
Posted by drafterman 4 years ago
drafterman
Tracked.
Posted by OberHerr 4 years ago
OberHerr
First is the worst. Second is the best. Third is he one with the hairiest chest!
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
First!
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: concession :(
Vote Placed by cheesedingo1 4 years ago
cheesedingo1
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: The first rounds that you both provided arguments with were very good. I was sad to see TV forfeit, and I wish the best of luck to Airmax and the rest of his campain.
Vote Placed by OberHerr 4 years ago
OberHerr
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: Concession.
Vote Placed by daytonanerd 4 years ago
daytonanerd
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: FF. Agree with TV as I think TV would be better if jim lost.
Vote Placed by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: Well, pro is dropping out.
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: Meow mix
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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: well i didnt see THAT coming! edited, technically a FF so I can now give points without anyone giving me crap about being biased :D
Vote Placed by WriterDave 4 years ago
WriterDave
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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:34 
Reasons for voting decision: Innomen's policies are wrong and misguided, and tvell has demonstrated a willingness to stand up to him; airmax has not. His concession forces me to give the balance of my vote to airmax, but arguments to tvell because I believe he would be a better president than innomen v2.0.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
tvellalottairmax1227Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: What imabench said