The Instigator
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Pressuring noobs vs Pressuring experienced players in mafia games.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+11
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...
Danielle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/28/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,294 times Debate No: 20094
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (3)

 

F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

I thank Danielle for accepting this challenge and look forward to debating this very interesting topic.

Resolution
: As a townie in a mafia game, pressuring players who are experienced or whose style you know is more beneficial to the town overall than pressuring a new player or a player whose style you are unaware of.

Round 1: Acceptance only
Round 4: No new arguments

Pro will defend the resolution.

Con will argue that pressuring new players or players whose style you are unaware of is more beneficial to the town overall.

More beneficial: Leading to a win.

The burden of proof is shared. Whichever debater shows their strategy to be superior will win the debate.

Voting period: 2 weeks
Argument time: 72 hours
Max Characters: 8000
Danielle

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent, F-16, for challenging me to what I expect will be a very interesting and fun discussion. I'm definitely looking forward to this topic after a string of more serious debates :)

To clarify my position, I will be arguing that it is more useful to an individual to pressue new players or a player whose style they are unaware of in order to better help assess their guilt. Assuming it is a somewhat experienced player doing this, it can prove to be more beneficial to the town overall in the sense that it will likely help yield more favorable results.

Thanks, Pro, and good luck!
Debate Round No. 1
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Thanks Con. I'll keep this short to allow Con enough space to refute my arguments as well as make her case.


C1) Scumtells are actually scumtells

Pressuring an inexperienced player would more often than not, result in behavior that relatively experienced players would consider a scumtell. Some examples would be:

1) Pressuring the player that pressured them or another player without claiming their character.

2) Refusing to character claim.

The mafia would then be able to interpret these behaviours as scumtells and use them to further pressure that player possibly for a role-claim. These percieved scumtells would also lead to other town players increasing pressure on the new player.

This problem can be solved by pressuring an experienced player. A relatively experienced player would be far more likely to give their character enabling town to move on.


C2) Guilt can be more easily assessed

This is similar to my first point but focusses more on pressuring players whose style you know. Each player reacts to pressure in a different way and has specific styles of playing. If the person pressuring is aware of the player's style, they would be able to read the player more easily than a player whose style they are unaware of. Why pressure a player whose style you don't know if you are not going to be able to assess their guilt based on their response?


C3) Information about the players role

Assuming that the player being pressured is a townie, a new player is far more likely than an experienced player to reveal a powerful role. They may reveal that they have the main character in the series, or they may reveal their role instead of character due to confusion over what a character is and what a role is.

Assuming that the pressured player is mafia, then the players mafia teammates can easily look up a good character claim for the new player. A noob mafia is likely to respond to pressure better than a noob townie due to the support system they have in their mafia PM whereas the noob townie is all alone.

Overall, pressuring noobs is likely to hurt more than help if they are town by making them look suspicious or revealing more info about their role than is beneficial to reveal in DP1. It is not likely to help if they are mafia because more experienced players in the mafia may give them good character claims as well tell them in their mafia PM exactly what to say in the Day Phase thread.


C4) Strategies used by a player to avoid claiming

If an experienced player is unwilling to claim their role, their most likely reaction would be to allude to a power role, claim that their role doesn't help the town, or give hints as to what their role may be hoping that the pressure would switch to a different person. These reactions can then be evaluated at the time of the actual role-claim to see if they are consistent with the player's previous actions with any inconsistencies being attributed as a scumtell.

The same cannot be said for a new player as they are far more likely to act in a way completely unrelated to their role as their primary focus would be on learning how to play and understanding the game. These behaviours are less likely to give clues about inconsistencies than the behaviours of an experienced player.


I don't have any sources right now but I may add sources in round 3 if required.
Danielle

Con

Thanks, F-16.

To be perfectly honest, this debate seems like a no-brainer to me. I'm surprised F-16 continues to challenge the strategy often credited to me of who to pressure on DP1, because it simply makes perfect sense :P

The logic behind voting for someone who's style you don't know is pretty straightforward:

1) If you aren't familiar with someone's style, it's likely because they're a n00b. In most games, n00bs are not given particularly decent roles because of their inability to use them effectively. As such, if you pressure a n00b and they are forced to reveal a townie role, it's likely not going to be a power role (or the most important role).

2) Because n00bs usually need help, the town can help direct their night actions so they are not wasted or misused. The town benefits from having information, and it's best to know information that pertains to n00bs so we can help and let the more experienced townies play in the shadows. As a most recent example, royalpaladdin attempted to vigilante kill the doctor in Inheritance Mafia, killing another townie in the process.

3) Some mods used to put n00bs in the mafia specifically to help them with strategy. As such, it can be statistically in your favor that a n00b is likely mafia. This may not always be the case, though, so it's not my most important point by any means (I just figured I'd throw it out there since it used to be the case).

Now onto the meat and potatoes of my argument...

4) The first primary reason to vote for n00bs is that they tend to SUCK at being mafia. I can easily dig up recent examples to prove this; hopefully F-16 doesn't make me (it'd be a waste of time). Thus if you pressure a more experienced player, they may completely trick you (bluesteel, TV, etc.). Their alignment is better left up to investigations or other night action revelations. Meanwhile, it is usually far easier for a n00b mafioso to mess up. For instance, in the Interwebz game CapLlock copy and pasted his role (resulting in a mod kill) - his MAFIA role. In other words, n00bs are more likely to fold under pressure, and not come up with good lies or explanations. This is true even though they may have help from mafia teammates. In the Miscellaneous Game, one mafia n00b PM'd other players (which should also result in a mod kill) rather than ask the mod or his teammates any questions or for help.

5) The second primary reason to pressure a n00b is that there is little to no benefit in pressuring an experienced player. Obviously they are going to participate, so you can rely on your reads and scum tells from them. There is no reason to pressure them because presumably you will pick up on whatever mafia tells you already know about them. In theory, you have figured out patterns that you recognize that can help you deduce whether or not they are mafia. With a n00b, you are completely blind to their playing style and have absolutely no idea what to look for or notice when they participate.

6) The final primary reason is that BECAUSE they are new, their behavior could easily be misconstrued as scummy. For example, royalpaladdin was convinced I was mafia in the Interwebz game even though ALL evidence proved contrary. Because she's a n00b, we can expect that kind of innocent bad playing. Meanwhile, if a more experienced player ignored all logic and evidence and played poorly, that would stick out as scummy. With a n00b, you cannot tell if their style is scummy or legitimately due to their inexperience.

Of course any mafia n00b would always claim their n00bish behavior is because they're a n00b and not scum. However there's really no way to tell. That's why being familiar with someone's style is so important. In past games, I have figured out when more experienced players were mafia because their playing was so off. The only way to tell if a n00b's idiocy is legitimate or not is to get a definitive claim from them. As such, it makes a lot of sense to pressure them initially for claims.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So now I'll address my opponent's points...

1) F-16 claims that n00bs typically fight when you ask them to claim, whereas more experienced players tend to give up their roles right off the bat. That is not entirely true. I know if I were pressured right away on DP1, I would fight it because it would seem non-sensical to me (for all aforementioned reasons). Meanwhile we have seen many cases of n00bs being forthcoming with their role. This is a shoddy contention because it requires on a lot of maybe's just like my 3rd contention (that's why my last 3 are the strongest).

What F-16 is essentially saying is that a n00b is likely to challenge pressure, thereby making themselves look guilty even if they are not. This SUPPORTS my position, because it confirms that n00bs tend to seem guilty unnecessarily. As such, character and role claims are often the best way to confirm them. Further, experienced players already know that this is typical n00bish behavior (hence F-16 bringing it up in the first place) meaning a more experienced player would NOT necessarily accept hesitation as scummy, and again getting a claim is the best possible way to confirm allegiance. This point of my opponent's supports my position.

2) Pro writes, "Each player reacts to pressure in a different way and has specific styles of playing. If the person pressuring is aware of the player's style, they would be able to read the player more easily than a player whose style they are unaware of." This is completely non-sensical. F-16 just said that with a player you know, you can read their style thus assess their guilt. However YOU DON'T NEED TO PRESSURE SOMEONE TO SEE THEIR STYLE. Their style can be assessed through what they say, how they say it, how they vote, their activity level, etc. Meanwhile, claims only give you that - claims. Therefore it makes perfect sense to pressure someone for a claim who's style you cannot read. Keep in mind that pressuring someone is not the same as INITIALLY pressuring someone. You might have a reason to pressure an experienced player, say if they seem guilty for Reason X or some night actions placed suspicion on them.

F-16 asks, "Why pressure a player whose style you don't know if you are not going to be able to assess their guilt based on their response?" This question practically answers itself. You don't know how to assess their guilt, therefore a claim from them is the best way to determine their likely guilt or innocence. An iffy claim means they would/should be subject to investigation. The better question is why ask for a claim from someone who's style you CAN read? If they seem shady, pressure them. If they don't, leave them be. If they are guilty and you know how to read them, then chances are you will realize that based on how they play - THEN you can pressure them for a claim. Remember, I'm not against pressuring experineced players. I'm arguing that it's more beneficial to INITIALLY pressure a n00b.

3) Pro says, "Overall, pressuring noobs is likely to hurt more than help if they are town by making them look suspicious or revealing more info about their role than is beneficial to reveal in DP1." This is completely not true. If they reveal a lot of information about their role (including a power role), it likely confirms their innocence - not guilt. It also doesn't distinguish how this pertains to n00bs in particular. F-16 is basically saying that someone will look guilty for telling the truth. This seems irrelevant and I completely disagree with this assessment anyway. Anyone with significant pressure should claim and probably be truthful about their role. He writes, "A new player is far more likely than an experienced player to reveal a powerful role," but that's not a problem and certainly not a contention in his favor.

4) I've already responded to C4 -- I'll explain further if need be.

Back to ye.
Debate Round No. 2
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

Thanks Danielle. I will start by defending my original arguments and then refuting Con's points.

DEFENCE

C1) Scumtells vs Noob mistakes

My contention here is that new players are hesitant to give up information whereas experienced players know the standard way to deal with pressure. Danielle says that if she was personally pressured, she would fight it, argue and not give up any information. However, the vast majority of experienced players would simply wait for enough votes and then give their character at which point, the other players would unvote and move on to a different player. A new player on the other hand may refuse to give up their character or may give too much info including their role, or may copy-paste their role PM. The majority of new players would be overwhelmed with the game and will not react to the pressure in a way that regular players would consider "standard." Con says that more experienced players are aware that noobs typically act in a way that is considered scummy and not persue it. However, experienced mafia will persue it and push for role-claims and lynches.

C2) Assessment of guilt

My point is that pressuring players whose style you know is more efficient because their reactions give you more insight than pressuring players you don't know. Con counters by saying that you don't need to pressure someone to see their style. The part that Con is missing is that when someone is pressured, their reaction to the pressure is what is telling. Do they stall? Do they stubbornly demand that more votes be placed on them and they won't claim until it is done? Do they turn the pressure on the accuser and counter-accuse them? It is those reactions that give away whether someone is mafia or town. When pressuring someone who you know, you will be able to see their reaction to determine their innocence or guilt. Pressuring someone you don't know does not give you the same insight.

Also, my opponent's rebuttal works in my favor as well. If experienced players are in general more difficult to read than new players, then pressuring them for a claim would be the only surefire way of analyzing their guilt or innocence. New players can be pressured later if they are found to slip up, and they are more likely to slip up compared to experienced players.

C3) Information about a player's role

Con doesn't really counter the meat of this point. I never said that revealing a power role makes a noob look suspicious. My argument is that new players unaware of how much they should reveal, may reveal far too much information about their role than is absolutely necessary. This puts a target on their back. For instance, a noob pressured for a character claim on DP1 may reveal that he/she is the doctor or watcher. This would cause them to be an instant target leading town to lose a power role.

Con doesn't respond to the fact that if the new player pressured is mafia, they have the support of their mafia teammates so can think of a good claim.

C4) Strategies used to avoid claiming

Pressuring an experienced player avoids the problem of revealing too much information. Even if asked for a role-claim, an experienced player might be able to convince the town that it is not in their best interest to push for it. Noobs will most likely lack those skills. This is why it is better to pressure a player who is confident enough to handle the pressure in a way that is most beneficial to the town.

REBUTTALS

I'll start by rebutting the "meat and potatoes" of my opponent's arguments which are points 4, 5, and 6 and then give a quick rebuttal to the other points.

4) Con says that the primary reason for voting for a noob is that they "suck" at mafia. She says that a more experienced player is likely to trick you whereas a noob would mess up. She would prefer that experienced players be investigated. But this creates a problem where the same group of experienced players always tend to be investigated first which is not a pleasant experience for anyone.

My opponent, for instance is well known for complaining that she is always the first to be investigated, killed, role-blocked, framed and a whole host of other things, and with good reason too. If she were pressured first, for instance, people might get a good feel of how she reacts to pressure and be able to draw conclusions from that as opposed to investigating her first every night. So, my position on pressuring experienced players would actually leave players like her less likely to be investigated which a net benefit.

5) Con says that you can rely on your reads and scum-tells from experienced players without pressuring them. However, the way a player plays without pressure is different from the way a players plays when under pressure. Their reaction to pressure IS the read that you should be looking for. They are also much more likely to commit their usual scum-tells when under pressure than when not.

6) "The only way to tell if a n00b's idiocy is legitimate or not is to get a definitive claim from them"

This argument can go both ways. The best players (like Con) are better at deception and seemingly play pro-town. So, it can be argued that the only way to tell if they are town or mafia is to get a definitive claim from them. For instance, most players would be hard pressed to tell when Con is town or mafia just by watching her playstyle but if she were to claim, it opens up many more possibilities that can determine innocence or guilt such as the role, its provability, past night actions etc. With a lot more information to go on, innocence or guilt can be more easily determined.

1) Con says that noobs will not likely get power roles. However, her method of assigning roles is to do it randomly. This isn't an exception as many of the other experienced mods agree with it. TVellalot says in the mod advice thread "I like Danielle's method of randomly assigning the characters to the numbers and letting people unwillingly pick their own."

This contention doesn't hold water as most mods starting with Danielle are more likely to assign roles randomly than deliberately give new players unimportant roles.

2) Con says that the town can help direct the night actions of new players so that they are not wasted on misused. However, "directing" night actions will likely result in the mafia knowing exactly who to target. As demonstrated in Heroes V Villains mafia, openly broadcasting all of the town's actions directly led to a town loss.

3) "As such, it can be statistically in your favor that a n00b is likely mafia."

This isn't true because the number of mafia range from 1/3 to 1/6 of the total players and going by my oppoenent's strategy, it is statistically more likely for any player (including a new player) to be town than mafia.

Sources
[1] http://www.debate.org...;
Danielle

Con

I waited til the last minute to post my round, but now I have plans and won't be able to post an argument :( Hopefully I am only penalized CONDUCT points and not automatic loss of points for Arguments. I whole-heartedly apologize to my opponent.
Debate Round No. 3
F-16_Fighting_Falcon

Pro

I completely understand if my opponent is busy and I look forward to her response in her next round. I already responded to most of Con's contentions and defended my own, so I have nothing else to go on other than provide a summary.

Summary
The core of Con's argument seems to be that players whose style that an individual knows should not be pressured initially because their style will become apparent to the individual as the game progresses. However, a player's reaction under pressure is a much better way to assess their guilt as they will likely be less composed than usual enabling others who know their style to pick up on their reactions.

Con prefers that new players be pressured initially because they "suck" and are much less likely to come up with a good story than experienced players. While that may be true, it is not adequate justification for pressuring new players first. Everyone's alignment needs to be known, not just the new players alignement. How does Con try to solve this problem? She recommends that experienced players be investigated while new players be pressured. However, as I pointed out, investigations are not fool-proof and are subject to many problems such as framing. Also, my opponent's strategy leads to the same group of players always being investigated first which makes them predictable targets for framers and lawyers and overall makes the town less likely to win. This problem can be solved by pressuring experienced players first to get a read on their reaction to pressure and deduce from their reaction their guilt.

This leaves my points about noob mistakes being perceived as scumtells which can be used by the mafia to pressure them further and get a possible lynch whereas if an experienced player is pressured first, any "scummy" reaction from them is likely because they are actually guilty and are making up stories and lying as opposed to because they have never played this game before.



Danielle

Con

Thanks, Pro!

== PRO'S ARGUMENTS ==


C1. Scumtells vs. Noob Mistakes


Pro says, "A new player may refuse to give up their character [upon pressure] or may give too much info including their role, or may copy-paste their role PM." First, giving up their character and/or role is exactly what they are being pressured to do. Plus, having a role revelation is not the end of the world (especially since most n00bs tend to not get the best roles for aforementioned reasons). I personally hate themed games, so role revelation is the only revelation in certain games anyway.

Second, a new player may do the same even if they are not the first to claim. It is the responsibility of everyone to keep an eye out for n00bs and warn against potential mistakes. Finally, Pro says that experienced mafioso may pursue n00b mistakes and push for lynches based on these mistakes. If an experienced player were to do that, I would pick up on it as scummy. Noticing these patterns and behaviors is exactly what mafia is all about. If Pro can say that experienced mafia will use n00b mistakes against them, then he is acknowledging that there are patterns you can use to determine which experienced players may be mafia (though once again we've got nothing to go on with n00bs).

C2. Assessment of Guilt

Pro writes, "My point is that pressuring players whose style you know is more efficient because their reactions give you more insight than pressuring players you don't know." In most cases you're merely relying on the claim itself. If we're playing in a Batman themed game, and I claim Batman, you are making a judgment based on the character that I claimed - not "my style." Now suppose I claimed a minor character. The mafia will attack any minor characters regardless of who claims them.

I've mentioned that you don't need to pressure someone to see their style. Pro says that when someone is pressured, their reaction to the pressure is what is telling. That may be so, but it doesn't negate the fact that style can be assessed even without pressure or claims. Also, EVERYONE'S reaction is going to be defensive, so this isn't really helpful.

Pro says that noticing if someone reverses pressure or "stubbornly demands" that more votes be placed on them before claiming are possible scumtells, and pressuring someone you don't know won't give you the same insight. Any experieneced player will not reveal information automatically (in most cases) without a sufficient amount of pressure, so these aren't scumtells. These are things the mafia picks out to specifically use against people and proclaim are scumtells whether it's true or not. If someone accuses me, and in turn I pressure them back, it doesn't necessarily make me guilty. I do it to mafia all the time. That is simply how the game is played. Sometimes you're lying, and sometimes you're not.

C3. Info About a Player's Role

Pro says, "My argument is that new players unaware of how much they should reveal... For instance, a noob pressured for a character claim on DP1 may reveal that he/she is the doctor or watcher." Again, it is up to the other players to help avoid these mistakes. If they do make a mistake, c'est la vie. Also, in most themed games character claims are practically the same as role claims. If we're playing in a Harry Potter theme, and a n00b claims Harry, guess what - Harry is getting role blocked or killed regardless of whether or not the mafia knows his role.

Pro also says "Con doesn't respond to the fact that if the new player pressured is mafia, they have the support of their mafia teammates so can think of a good claim." First, the mafia usually never has any idea what to claim on DP1 until they get a clue from a townie claim about what to say and what to avoid. Second, even so the mafia cannot typically claim a power character or role, so if they do claim that it's probably legit, and if they don't it will be suspicious just as it would by any minor character or role.

C4. Strategies Used to Avoid Claiming

Pro says, "Even if asked for a role-claim, an experienced player might be able to convince the town that it is not in their best interest to push for it." This is silly. If an experienced player says, "Don't pick me cuz I totally have an important role," people will either (a) say this is shady and make them claim anyway, or (b) it automatically puts a target on them for killing or role blocking. There really isn't much to this contention, and as I explained in an earlier round I've already addressed this point. Anyone who is initially pressured will be expected to claim a certain level of information initially. This is dependant on the theme and not experience.

== CON'S ARGUMENTS ==

C4. I pointed out that when pressured, n00bs (because they tend to suck at being mafia) typically fold under pressure and do not put up a decent fight because they aren't experienced enough to know how. Meanwhile it is harder to assess an experienced player's guilt (i.e., bluesteel, tvellalott, etc.) so determining their guilt is better left up to investigations and other scumtells, or character and role revelation later on in the game since they will be better at utilizing their night actions. Pro's only response is that, "But this creates a problem where the same group of experienced players always tend to be investigated first which is not a pleasant experience for anyone." Actually the only people it isn't pleasant for are those experienced players in particular, and F-16 is preaching to the choir. I am one of those players. It sucks. But you know what? More people play, become experienced, and eventually everyone (or most people) become equally threatening. Before bluesteel started playing mafia, 9/10 night actions were directed toward me on NP1 (some mod gave me that statistic -- I think askbob). Now, players have other threats to choose from. Plus, everyone's style is different. I tend to not automatically target big players early on with my night actions, but that's me.

C5. I've said that with experienced players, you have figured out patterns that you recognize that can help you deduce whether or not they are mafia. With a n00b, you are completely blind to their playing style and have absolutely no idea what to look for or notice when they participate. Therefore, claims are the ONLY initial way to determine one's level of suspicion. Pro says, "Their [experienced players] reaction to pressure IS the read that you should be looking for." This is merely Pro's opinion and is certainly not the only way to assess style. I've pointed out that everybody is going to be defensive regardless of their affiliation. I've also specifically named other ways to determine one's game-play that have nothing to do with reacting to pressure, such as how they vote, who they pressure and why, the tone of what they say and how they say it, their activity level, bandwagoning, etc.

C6. The point is simple - The only way to tell if a n00b's idiocy is legitimate or not is to get a definitive claim from them. Pro says this can "go both ways" and that since experienced mafioso play pro-town, you ought to rely on a claim from them. This isn't true because -- once again -- there are other things you can rely on for assessment. Meanwhile, with a noob the ONLY intitial way to assess how they are playing is with a claim, because they don't know how they SHOULD be playing. If I make a mistake, it would be indicative of my guilt. If a n00b makes a mistake, it is definitely not necessarily indicative of their guilt.

---

My other contentions were never important so they can easily be dropped with no detriment to my case. However, FYI it's not true that most mods assign roles randomly. I don't want to lose Sources points automatically, so I will reference the same source in which it is specifically outlined to make sure there are equal levels of experience on both sides which goes against the idea of random assignments [1].

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

Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by drafterman 2 years ago
drafterman
The points that really did it for me were Danielle's C5 and C6:

C5 - Unnecessary to pressure experienced players because they participate and provide enough information to "read" anyway.

Now, I understand F-16's point that he specifically wants to see their reaction to pressure, but if they're experienced, then they're responses should be mechanical, as F-16 himself pointed out: they wait until they have enough votes, claim, then move on.

Also, those you are unfamiliar with the game are unlikely to take the intiative and participate without being prodded, thus pressuring noob's forces them to be in the game. If you look at newer players like VK and Caps, they don't say or contribute much unless they are bandwagoning or the target of pressure themselves.

C6 - Since noob behavior is indistinguishable from scummy behavior, you need additional information to determine which is the case.

I think this is the strongest point, and is validated in practice. Take VK, for example. He ALWAYS seems scummy to me. I pegged him for mafia in Illuminati, a Beginners game (as Jester), and Tarantino (as SK). But he can't always be scum, so in the latter two games it required additional knowledge in order to make that determination.

All in all, a good debate.
Posted by nonentity 2 years ago
nonentity
I don't typically read debates (I know, why am I here?) but I really enjoyed this. Well done to both of you. Unfortunately, I'm torn. You both made very convincing arguments. At the moment, you're tied for me :(
Posted by Greyparrot 2 years ago
Greyparrot
Rwar
Posted by drafterman 2 years ago
drafterman
VTL Danielle for not posting an argument.
Posted by BlackVoid 2 years ago
BlackVoid
If you report me I'll tell Innomen you're cheating on him. I saw you and Bluesteel in the closet last night!
Posted by Maikuru 2 years ago
Maikuru
I've also asked him to temporarily close your account, BlackVoid. When you get back, I'll be ready to hear your apology.
Posted by Lickdafoot 2 years ago
Lickdafoot
FOS on Maikuru!

Seriously, I am too excited about this debate. We put debating in mafia, it's about time we put mafia into debating! :P
Posted by BlackVoid 2 years ago
BlackVoid
Maikuru are you serious? You did a debate about a game mode in Call of Duty. That excludes even more voters.
Posted by Maikuru 2 years ago
Maikuru
This debate is bias against people like me who have no idea what the hell you're talking about. I've asked innomen to consider deleting it.
Posted by socialpinko 2 years ago
socialpinko
Favorited.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by drafterman 2 years ago
drafterman
F-16_Fighting_FalconDanielleTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Danielle wins this one for me, I'll explain in detail in the comments.
Vote Placed by tvellalott 2 years ago
tvellalott
F-16_Fighting_FalconDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Great debate guys; I think Danielles points were much stronger. I was actually torn coming into this debate about whether the SOP should change, but I'm convinced now that pressuring newbs is the best way, at the cost of experienced players needing to be investigated (which is to my detriment >_<). Very close.
Vote Placed by royalpaladin 2 years ago
royalpaladin
F-16_Fighting_FalconDanielleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Very close debate. Danielle wins Contention 4 (experienced players) because F_16's turn was basically overriden and weak. Danielle also wins the dropped argument that getting a claim is not necessary to watch a person's style: in fact, it is often meaningless. Conduct to F-16 because Danielle did not post for one of the rounds.