Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

The debate point system

Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 6:57:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
So the way the points are awarded when voteing in debates is.....

Who had better conduct:--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--2 points

I think we could have a better balance on how you get points. For instance I regard the most important thing the actual arguments themselves.

But if some one has the better arguments, but loses all the other area's that means they will get 3 points, while their opponent gets 4 points.

This seems wrong to me.

I suggest something like the better arguments should get 5 points or at least 4 points.
That way the better arguments can't possible lose even if they lose all the other area's.

What do you think ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 10:36:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/11/2011 6:57:34 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
So the way the points are awarded when voteing in debates is.....

Who had better conduct:--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--2 points

I think we could have a better balance on how you get points. For instance I regard the most important thing the actual arguments themselves.

But if some one has the better arguments, but loses all the other area's that means they will get 3 points, while their opponent gets 4 points.

This seems wrong to me.

Well let's look at it in context. Let's pretend that I have strong arguments, but they're a sourceless, disrespectful, grammatical wasteland. Do I deserve to win? Should I be encouraged?

There was a motion a while back to keep only the arguments category, because that's what a debate is, but having these as voting criteria enforces the professional nature of this site. In most cases, these categories are ties, but if they aren't, the difference is deserved.

Perhaps sources should only be one point. The voting system is definitely imperfect, but for the criteria to be adjusted, there must be a consensus on the value of the categories.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
PFD_Debater
Posts: 13
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2011 10:56:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/11/2011 10:36:42 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 4/11/2011 6:57:34 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
So the way the points are awarded when voteing in debates is.....

Who had better conduct:--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--2 points

I think we could have a better balance on how you get points. For instance I regard the most important thing the actual arguments themselves.

But if some one has the better arguments, but loses all the other area's that means they will get 3 points, while their opponent gets 4 points.

This seems wrong to me.

Well let's look at it in context. Let's pretend that I have strong arguments, but they're a sourceless, disrespectful, grammatical wasteland. Do I deserve to win? Should I be encouraged?

There was a motion a while back to keep only the arguments category, because that's what a debate is, but having these as voting criteria enforces the professional nature of this site. In most cases, these categories are ties, but if they aren't, the difference is deserved.

Perhaps sources should only be one point. The voting system is definitely imperfect, but for the criteria to be adjusted, there must be a consensus on the value of the categories.

Since there are six possible points, why not just give all six point to the voter to allot as they wish?