The Instigator
qopel
Pro (for)
Losing
27 Points
The Contender
royalpaladin
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

Something needs to be done about vote bombs

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 12 votes the winner is...
royalpaladin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,331 times Debate No: 30792
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (107)
Votes (12)

 

qopel

Pro

This website can be a lot of fun. Sure things can get heated and that's why there are points that can be lost or awarded based on rudeness.

There are people, however (mostly teens) that think they are justified to be vigilantes and administer their own form of point awards with the use of vote bombs.
This results in more vote bombs and votes that result trying to counter-act the vote bombs.

Ultimately, this results in the entire voting system becoming useless. I would suggest a blocking mechanism to block known vote bombers from voting.

Sure, the votes really aren't the reason why people debate. The votes and the reasons for votes, help debaters understand other people's though processes.

It's a valuable tool that is being destroyed by vote bombers who think they have the right to act like bigger jerks then the ones they claim to be jerks.
royalpaladin

Con

Pro's position assumes that nothing is currently being done about votebombs. Currently, members are free to counter votebombs as well as to submit complaints to administrators who will strip votebombers of their voting privileges. My opponent's solution already occurs in the status quo, and his position presumes that these measures are not being taken. Vote Con on the basis is that his solution is nonunique.
Debate Round No. 1
107 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TUF 4 years ago
TUF
Pro posts one round debate, and doesn't clarify debate specifications in R1 for acceptance, and then gets mad at voters for voting Con on a clear winning argument lol.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
The real foul is those voters who don't like the conditions my opponent has agreed to and vote against me based on the conditions, rather than my opponent not adhering to them.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
"qopel has a propensity for setting up crazily rigid debate parameters with little to no apparent room for undeniable logic.."

Am I putting a gun to people's heads and saying they have to agree to that? Anyone who takes on the debate, accepts the challenge under my conditions.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
You weren't kidding. That was pretty accurate.
Posted by Beginner 4 years ago
Beginner
I'm just kidding Mr. qopel... friends? :)
Posted by Beginner 4 years ago
Beginner
qopel has a propensity for setting up crazily rigid debate parameters with little to no apparent room for undeniable logic..
He also destroys other viable ways to establish a good argumentative position (railing against anything that doesn't follow his ideal form of premise-construction based on his standard of logic.)
I CALL FOUL!
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
This debate was "Something needs to be done about votebombs"...That implies that what's now being done isn't working and there is an ongoing problem with vote bombs.

I came here to debate with facts and logic, and all I get is words games, semantics, exploitation and vote bombs. If that's all this website is about, it's a waste of my time.

Have fun with that.
Posted by royalpaladin 4 years ago
royalpaladin
I like how you're complaining about losing a debate because of a CVB. It's almost as if you wanted the votebombing points to help you win . . . Pretty hypocritical given that you are an anti-VB crusader.

I agree that you are dealt with in an unjust manner on this site, and I have personally discussed this with the site administration and requested that they intervene on your behalf, so don't start attacking me unless you want to lose one of your few supporters.
Posted by royalpaladin 4 years ago
royalpaladin
I'm sure that some people would rather counter than vote on the debate, but who cares? Those people probably aren't going to vote fairly anyways.

qopel, this debate was "Something needs to be done about votebombs". That implies that nothing is being done. There was a hole in your wording that I exploited. You can't shift the meaning of the debate after I accept it.
Posted by royalpaladin 4 years ago
royalpaladin
How is a CVB "just as bad"? If Pro votebombs with 7 points, those 7 points need to be cancelled so that they have no impact on the debate. If someone claims they are countering a vote that was not a votebomb, that is a votebomb.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by x2MuzioPlayer 4 years ago
x2MuzioPlayer
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's stance is, essentially, that there is not enough being done about poor practice in voting. Notice how there was a CVB to the original VB to this debate. It shows how there are already actions in place to prevent poor voting. Also, Con pointed out administrators can strip voting privileges as well as have a forum for un-voted, forfeited, and vote bombed debates. The actions presented are non-unique and I default Con. Edit: I have decided to use my reliable sources vote and S&G vote to cancel out 1dustpelt's CVB, since BennyW has changed his vote. Of course, if 1dustpelt fixes his vote, I'll remove these points.
Vote Placed by BennyW 4 years ago
BennyW
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: On further examination I realize that con's argument is not legitimate, the fact that the vote bombing problem persists is the whole point.
Vote Placed by TSH 4 years ago
TSH
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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: "on the basis is that his solution is nonunique"
Vote Placed by sbaik610 4 years ago
sbaik610
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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: "on the basis is that his solution is nonunique"
Vote Placed by proglib 4 years ago
proglib
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: While I have lot of respect for Royal, I think that Pro's argument is correct. More RFD in the comments.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering Magic
Vote Placed by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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: Stuff is being done.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: counter benny
Vote Placed by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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: Royals argument that something is being done clinched the debate.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
qopelroyalpaladinTied
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: As Con suggests, vote bombs are already addressed by multiple means: a thread to ID vote bombs, counter vote bombs to eliminate their impact, and notifying admins of people who repeatedly abuse their voting rights for more aggressive action. Pro has not met the burden of proof for showing this system is "useless" and that any changes are necessary. The VB and counter-VB in this debate itself is a great example.