Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Sources should be 1 point

Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives ?
"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
randolph7
Posts: 307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 8:53:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives

Arguments are important. But even if your argument is convincing without sources it's really just an assertion.

Spelling/grammar are important because it makes the arguments easier to follow. When there's massive grammar problems, I usually give the argument to the other side because I just can't follow what they're saying and I'm not about to break out my gibberish to English dictionary. When it's lesser then I just give the spelling to the better speller. Perhaps, if it was a part of the argument points would work because penalizing minor spelling errors really doesn't have much of a point.

That said, if it's changed people will be upset with the new system as well. I take it as imperfect but okay. And I'd deal with a different system if it was used as well. I think someone somewhere mentioned a straight 7 point system for whoever you thought was the winner. Doesn't really bother me one way or the other.
"ahh but i have indeed found the burdon of truth the, muffs have found it. oh mothy dear dear mothy"
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 9:29:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives ?

I agree with you, it doesn't seem right to win the argumentation, but lose the debate. Bottom line is that no matter what we do, as long as it's a voting system, people will find a way to make it unfair.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 10:20:00 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives ?

It is hard to have nonsensical arguments, but have really good sources to back those arguments up.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
randolph7
Posts: 307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 12:34:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 10:20:00 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives ?

It is hard to have nonsensical arguments, but have really good sources to back those arguments up.

But not impossible ;)
"ahh but i have indeed found the burdon of truth the, muffs have found it. oh mothy dear dear mothy"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 12:38:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
No. No a thousand times no. You want people to full "facts" out of a magic hat and onyl lose 1 point for it. Imagine if someone made up compelling statistics that won him convincing argument, but since they were false and made up (but voters don't know that, they only know that he didn't provide a source), he lost sources. He would still win the debate for lying. Sources should be 3 points if anything.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 5:32:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you don't like the idea of sources being 1 point, I am open to the idea of arguments been 4 points.

So lets consider you win arguments and lose everything else you get 4 points and your opponent gets sources 2, s&G 1, conduct 1, so its a tie.

Again if you win arguments you may tie but at least you can't lose.
"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
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 5:39:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

There are others problems like if you win arguments and the other person gets sources + one other category its tied, even if their entire argument is complete bs.

If sources are 1 point, at least if you win argument and the opponent wins everything else you get a tie, but at least you don't lose.

Yay or Nay ? comments, other alternatives ?

Agreed.

I'd even be ok with making "sources" a part of "arguments"

like.. Only have arguments.. and in the explanation for what "arguments" entails say the strength of the relevant sources if they're important to the argument.

What is most ridiculous is that certain kinds of arguments may not need sources at all... but both sides are behooved to do a little Sourcing dance.. and if one doesn't do this unnecessary step they're penalized..

that said, I'm much too cool to care about such things :P lol 8)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2011 5:43:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 12:38:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
No. No a thousand times no. You want people to full "facts" out of a magic hat and onyl lose 1 point for it. Imagine if someone made up compelling statistics that won him convincing argument,

it's not a convincing argument if the claims require sourcing to have legitimacy...

in Fact-based arguments Sources are Indeed required to have a good argument.. and if your argument is unsupported.. it's not good.

but there are other kinds of arguments where "sources" can be unecessary at best... or even distracting... when there's no need for sourcing, there's no reason to have a category for it...
and when there is a need for it to support the type of argument.. it can easily be reflected in the "argument" category.

but since they were false and made up (but voters don't know that, they only know that he didn't provide a source), he lost sources. He would still win the debate for lying. Sources should be 3 points if anything.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2011 9:01:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 5:43:32 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 8/19/2011 12:38:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
No. No a thousand times no. You want people to full "facts" out of a magic hat and onyl lose 1 point for it. Imagine if someone made up compelling statistics that won him convincing argument,

it's not a convincing argument if the claims require sourcing to have legitimacy...

in Fact-based arguments Sources are Indeed required to have a good argument.. and if your argument is unsupported.. it's not good.

but there are other kinds of arguments where "sources" can be unecessary at best... or even distracting... when there's no need for sourcing, there's no reason to have a category for it...
and when there is a need for it to support the type of argument.. it can easily be reflected in the "argument" category.

but since they were false and made up (but voters don't know that, they only know that he didn't provide a source), he lost sources. He would still win the debate for lying. Sources should be 3 points if anything.

I kinda like Matt's idea. Sources are part of your argument, so why have a seperate category. This is distracting when you don't really need sources for the argument, but have to go find something anyway, just so you don't lose those 2 points.
CD-Host
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/23/2011 7:10:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/19/2011 6:32:58 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
If you win the arguments - 3 points but lose everything else sources 2, conduct 1, spelling 1 you still lose.

Why is this messed up ? cause in theory, you can provide the most non nonsensical argument, yet as long as your super nice, dot your I's and cross your T's and use good sources you can still win.

So you:
a) Presented the argument substantially better, enough to win SnG
b) Your opponent had a conduct violation.
c) You found good sources to back up your position which your opponent was not able to turn against you. That is you found quality people who agree with you.

I don't have a problem with that person winning. Say for example someone was arguing the ptolemaic system effectively. There are really good sources but if they pull that off without their opponent finding specific counter sources... yeah I don't have a problem with them winning.