The Instigator
erkifish26
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points
The Contender
solo
Con (against)
Losing
19 Points

Resolved: Debate.org should change its round forfeiting rules.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2008 Category: Technology
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,777 times Debate No: 1940
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (11)

 

erkifish26

Pro

This should be a fun one.

1) The Debate.org rules actually prevent the discourse that they try to promote, therefore defeating the purpose of the site. The debates, although offering some competition, are not supposed to be purely competitive. This is best evidenced by the lack of a leader board or any rating/ranking system. The main point of the website is to allow people from all around to argue.

2) The problem with forfeiting individual rounds is that it leaves the opponent left with nothing to say. There's little point in just putting out more arguments, because that spreads the purpose of the debate too thin and wastes time, seeing as nobody is responding. Also, it cuts a round out of the debate, which in a short debate can lead to no actual debating at all.

3) If we do view Debate.org as competitive, then forfeiting allows certain people to inflate their record without doing anything. This is inherently bad for competition, because it makes good debaters look comparably worse than their peers who have gotten lucky.

Alternative: If somebody forgets or chooses not to respond, the opposing debater should have the choice of whether to extend time or to end the debate. This allows those who view these debates as competitive to get the wins they feel they deserve and those who view these debates as forums to get the discussion they deserve.
solo

Con

<<1) The Debate.org rules actually prevent the discourse that they try to promote, therefore defeating the purpose of the site. The debates, although offering some competition, are not supposed to be purely competitive. This is best evidenced by the lack of a leader board or any rating/ranking system. The main point of the website is to allow people from all around to argue.>>

I fail to see where you're coming from -- the site IS supposed to be purely competitive. There doesn't need to be a leaderboard, as we have individual statistics in our profiles. The site does as it was intended: it allows "people from all around to argue."

<<2) The problem with forfeiting individual rounds is that it leaves the opponent left with nothing to say. There's little point in just putting out more arguments, because that spreads the purpose of the debate too thin and wastes time, seeing as nobody is responding. Also, it cuts a round out of the debate, which in a short debate can lead to no actual debating at all.>>

Yes, it also leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the voters. The system is fine the way it is and should be left alone.

<<3) If we do view Debate.org as competitive, then forfeiting allows certain people to inflate their record without doing anything. This is inherently bad for competition, because it makes good debaters look comparably worse than their peers who have gotten lucky.>>

Is it fair? No. But there's going to be flaws in changing the system. I prefer the forfeiting rules to remain as they are because there isn't anything wrong with them. If a person gains status because their opponent forfeits, sobeit. I think your personal competitive nature is clouding your judgement.

<>

It seems to me the reason you've created this debate is to help make the ratings more accurate, but you cannot do that on a site of this nature. Many of the voters don't vote with the same criteria, so YOU will never be pleased with how the site works.

The site is fine. Leave it alone.
Debate Round No. 1
erkifish26

Pro

While my opponent does make valid responses, they fail to respond to my alternative itself. Although some people do like the competitive nature of the site, others do enjoy the discursive nature. Therefore, if Debate.org allowed people to extend their opponent's times in hope of a response, that would be a completely valid change. You can vote right there, because that is a change in the forfeiting rules (albeit a small one) that could cause no harm (at least as far as I can see).

My opponent also failed to respond to my second point, which states that forfeiting rounds makes it impossible to respond. I'm somewhat confused as to what to make of the response my opponent did make. He never explains why this point is not valid, so hopefully he can clarify that in his next speech.

I don't really need to extend my first or third point. I feel like the alternative and the "impossibility to respond" argument cover it.
solo

Con

<>

My responses are valid and just because you deem them invalid do not make it so. I could just as easily say that not only are you not an adult, and you do not even have a complete high school education, therefore your opinions are not valid. It just doesn't work that way. Also, each debater is given THREE DAYS to make an argument. If a debater cannot get his/her act together in THREE WHOLE DAYS, then the debater should not have accepted/posted the challenge. It's just that simple.

<>

Again, you are wrong because I posted, "it also leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the voters". By forfeiting a round it makes a huge impact on many of us. It is disrespectful and I cast my vote on such debates taking that into consideration. You are focused on the voting and the statistical reflections that the voting casts, so my points are very relevent to how the system works and how it is fine the way it is now.

<>

Forfeited rounds comes down to a matter of respect. If you don't respect your argument or your opponent, it makes a huge impact on the voters and they vote accordingly. To change the site because you are not satisfied with it is laughable, but I suppose the voters will decide who is right in this matter.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
erkifish26

Pro

I totally respect you and your ideas and I'm sorry if I made that less than clear. I am extremely appreciative of you taking part in this debate with me. I never said your opinions were invalid.

I do agree that the three day time limit should be sufficient, but I do not see why it should be mandatory. For example, if I forget to post a response to a friend in a friendly debate, I don't see why that round should be forfeited if neither of us want it to be forfeited. If I start debating my friend and then a huge math test comes up and we both want to take a few day break to study, why should we be forced to forfeit rounds and restart the debate? In this sense, it's not a lack of respect, but a mutual agreement to quit. In cases where debaters feel that it is a lack of respect, then they can choose to have their opponent forfeit the round.

My opponent never says what the downside to having a choice on forfeits would be, despite the fact that I invite him to. He simply states that it everybody should be able to respond within 3 days. I allow both people who want the 3 day standard and people who don't want it to have their way. Therefore, there is no reason not to vote for me.

My opponent states that forfeiting "leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the voters" because of the statistical part of the website. This goes back to a point that I raised before... forfeits allow some people to get unfair wins. He claimed that this came simply as a result of my competitive nature, but apparently other people (including my opponent) buy into this. If people don't want to vote for forfeiters because they mess up stats, then we should find a way to fix this problem.

Thank you very much. This has been fun.
solo

Con

I respect you as well, but my argument was purely part of the debate, so "no harm - no foul". Now on with Round Three...

In the case of friends debating one another, arrangements could be made between the two. You and your friend could debate via email, then post your arguments at the site to be voted upon.

Also, back to your alternative, you are assuming that everyone here votes like you. They do not, as you can go to many closed debates and see that voting has not been absolute for either Pro or Con, but split in most cases.

<>

Having an outstanding debate is kind of like having an outstanding balance on an account. It is something that is due in a timely manner. By initiating your proposals, debates will fill up the queue unnecessarily and disappoint many of the audience of this site. This is a debate, not a weekly television program -- three days is reasonable.

<>

Your proposition also allows for unfairness. If a debater predicts their own defeat, you make no mention of what would happen if he decided to forfeit in order to save himself from suffering a loss. It's a flawed plan that does not need to be implemented.

<>

Thank you too. Have a great weekend!
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by solo 9 years ago
solo
If it makes an difference, I agree. I think the structure of the site could use many modifications.

Good luck!
Posted by solo 9 years ago
solo
"This should be a fun one." I'd be inclined to agree if it weren't FIVE ROUNDS. Too long for me, but best of luck!
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by bthr004 8 years ago
bthr004
erkifish26soloTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by solo 9 years ago
solo
erkifish26soloTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by cLoser 9 years ago
cLoser
erkifish26soloTied
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 
Vote Placed by massvideogamer 9 years ago
massvideogamer
erkifish26soloTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
erkifish26soloTied
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 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 9 years ago
Johnicle
erkifish26soloTied
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 
Vote Placed by snoboguy1230 9 years ago
snoboguy1230
erkifish26soloTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
erkifish26soloTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by mikemc5921 9 years ago
mikemc5921
erkifish26soloTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Grandma 9 years ago
Grandma
erkifish26soloTied
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