Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Informal RFD etiquette

F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.

2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.

3) Don't vote conduct off anyone who doesn't forfeit unless you want them to PM you and have an hour long discussion about why you voted conduct against them.

4) ____________
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:12:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.

2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.

3) Don't vote conduct off anyone who doesn't forfeit unless you want them to PM you and have an hour long discussion about why you voted conduct against them.

4) ____________

It didn't happen because of the conduct vote, but a few months ago someone argued with me for 3 straight hours about a 3 comment long RFD I gave. And it wasn't Sieben.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:19:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.


"1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't." There is no need to act in such a false manner. If some one says the same thing in all circumstances your just hurting your own integrity.

If you are concerned about getting an emotive response with such phrases as "arguments were dismantled" then just don't use such phrases. You can always point our that argument X stands unrefuted and the counter argument of Y was ineffective because.......ergo person 1 wins.
"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
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:20:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:12:51 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.

2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.

3) Don't vote conduct off anyone who doesn't forfeit unless you want them to PM you and have an hour long discussion about why you voted conduct against them.

4) ____________

It didn't happen because of the conduct vote, but a few months ago someone argued with me for 3 straight hours about a 3 comment long RFD I gave. And it wasn't Sieben.

And it was?
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:23:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

Yes, I thought I was the only one who believed this.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:24:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

yes, but in the real debate conduct is a given. There are other forms of pressure to make people write in complete sentences and be on their best behavior. Here online, the vote is the only pressure.
"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
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:24:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.
I personally dislike having to concern about how members would view my RFDs. The purpose of an RFD is to at least provide an explanation for why you voted in such and such way, not to concern yourself about a member's reaction....

2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.
Sources can be tied [with the arguments ] if they're used extensively in an argument. For example, if I am in a debate about____, and I present a study for my side but such a study is proven to be biased and so on, it lowers the credibility of my arguments...

3) Don't vote conduct off anyone who doesn't forfeit unless you want them to PM you and have an hour long discussion about why you voted conduct against them.
Again, I am not concerned with having someone argue with me if I took off a point of conduct even if they did not forfeit.

Even if they do, then simply ignore them. And note that it depends on the nature of the "hour long discussion" for people to abide by this rule.

4) ____________
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:26:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:23:17 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

Yes, I thought I was the only one who believed this.

In my opinion arguments are the only things that matter. Sources are used to back up arguments, and S&G/conduct are irrelevant unless they're so terrible that they justify voting against the person
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:27:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:24:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

yes, but in the real debate conduct is a given. There are other forms of pressure to make people write in complete sentences and be on their best behavior. Here online, the vote is the only pressure.

Where did you hear that? I know the NFL awards speaker points, but not conduct.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:30:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:24:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

yes, but in the real debate conduct is a given. There are other forms of pressure to make people write in complete sentences and be on their best behavior. Here online, the vote is the only pressure.


What happens when members challenge or discount those votes, 000ike?
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:33:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:26:12 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:23:17 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

Yes, I thought I was the only one who believed this.

In my opinion arguments are the only things that matter. Sources are used to back up arguments, and S&G/conduct are irrelevant unless they're so terrible that they justify voting against the person

Well it looks like we have different reasons for supporting it.

My reason is that some people find weird reasons to dock somebody conduct or sources. I've seen people lose spelling because they had like 2 mistakes all round. Some people dock conduct for saying "vote pro/con", or some other absurd reason. One time, I saw somebody vote sources to Pro because "they had more" when in reality they had less . This makes their vote count more than everyone else's even though their judging criteria is extremely controversial, which seems unfair.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:34:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:30:47 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:24:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

yes, but in the real debate conduct is a given. There are other forms of pressure to make people write in complete sentences and be on their best behavior. Here online, the vote is the only pressure.


What happens when members challenge or discount those votes, 000ike?

lmao Do you enjoy proving me right? We just had an argument about how you always reply to everything I write in a snide and testy way. Here you are again. lol this is hilarious.
"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
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:37:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:34:31 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:30:47 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:24:19 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

yes, but in the real debate conduct is a given. There are other forms of pressure to make people write in complete sentences and be on their best behavior. Here online, the vote is the only pressure.


What happens when members challenge or discount those votes, 000ike?

lmao Do you enjoy proving me right? We just had an argument about how you always reply to everything I write in a snide and testy way. Here you are again. lol this is hilarious.



Once again, 000ike, doesn't go back to the main point...I'm finding this hilarious myself since you have never defined what snide or testy is and refuse to get to the point.

I wonder what happens if another member asks the same thing to 000ike...Would he laugh and talk about its 'snide and testy way'?
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:38:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Here... on the internet...

There is no etiquette.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2011 10:39:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:33:56 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:26:12 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:23:17 PM, BlackVoid wrote:
At 10/9/2011 10:20:22 PM, thett3 wrote:
I dont like the voting system anyway. It ought to be one point per vote, just like real debates.

Yes, I thought I was the only one who believed this.

In my opinion arguments are the only things that matter. Sources are used to back up arguments, and S&G/conduct are irrelevant unless they're so terrible that they justify voting against the person

Well it looks like we have different reasons for supporting it.

My reason is that some people find weird reasons to dock somebody conduct or sources. I've seen people lose spelling because they had like 2 mistakes all round. Some people dock conduct for saying "vote pro/con", or some other absurd reason. One time, I saw somebody vote sources to Pro because "they had more" when in reality they had less . This makes their vote count more than everyone else's even though their judging criteria is extremely controversial, which seems unfair.

I think you have a point. Other than your animal rights debate, I remember others where the number of votes were equal but one voter had given conduct to one debater and that was the difference that led to victory.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2011 2:35:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.

I rarely vote on sources. I will only do so if it is obvious. The voters have little place verifying sources anyway, that is the job of the debaters. If they fail to point out what is wrong with their opponent's source that is their loss.

I especially hate when voters vote based on who had more sources. Some arguments need sources, some arguments don't. That is the question that should be asked. Debaters should not be punished for making strong arguments on their own, yet we do this by rewarding the ones who rely on google.
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2011 2:47:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
As of note, I'm still waiting for 000ike to answer my question...Unfortunately, 000ike feels the need to mock me so he shouldn't, by some logic, answer me.

I'm also confused to how 000ike can decide when I am being testy and accusatory and when I am not, but then again based on his own bias--he feels that I am being both all the time, and therefore he should not address it...

Hopefully, 000ike can respond to all that I have posted, but since he refuses to then I suppose that he'll just laugh at my 'unhealthy obsession'...or in other words, run away as usual.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2011 9:33:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Disputes over RFDs are an inevitable consequence of having open voting and requiring RFDs. The main effect is to discourage voting to avoid the blowback. Still, it's a debate site, so RFDs are just one more thing to debate. Complaints about RFDs encourage more careful judging.

Anyway, giving false opinions is not good etiquette. If a debate was lopsided, it's better go directly to the reasons why it was lopsided rather than making overall pronouncements about how bad it was. People don't much care about the specifics of why something was good, but they do care about why it was bad.

The various categories are especially useful in cases where someone put up a good appearance, but didn't deliver on the arguments. Where is also the opposite case where somebody forfeits, but the opponent failed to go n and refute the arguments already made. In genuinely close debates, the categories can help explain a close decision.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2011 11:37:13 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/9/2011 10:02:18 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
After giving a lot of RFDs, I understood the informal RFD etiquette on DDO.

1) Always say that the debate was close even if it wasn't. Never say that "arguments were dismantled" or "landslide" unless the person who lost is no longer active. People get furious when you say that they lost comprehensively and the debate wasn't close.

A lot of people are not following the informal etiquette.


2) Vote on arguments only not on sources, unless you can give an extra 20 lines worth of RFD explaining why the sources are better.

I only vote sources if one was substianially better. If both sides used good sources to back their arguments up, and the winner really was based on logical refutations, then sources should be even.


3) Don't vote conduct off anyone who doesn't forfeit unless you want them to PM you and have an hour long discussion about why you voted conduct against them.

The only reason to vote off conduct would be if someone had bad conduct. That means, missing deadlines, or treating their opponent poorly (like bad mouthing them).


4) ____________

5) Profit!
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:03:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/10/2011 2:35:27 AM, Double_R wrote:
I especially hate when voters vote based on who had more sources.

Perhaps we should change the language of the ballet. "Who used the most reliable sources?" may be interpreted as, "Who used most sources (count only those which are reliable)?"

Perhaps it would be clearer if we said something like, "Whose sources were more reliable?"
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 11:53:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 11:03:41 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/10/2011 2:35:27 AM, Double_R wrote:
I especially hate when voters vote based on who had more sources.

Perhaps we should change the language of the ballet. "Who used the most reliable sources?" may be interpreted as, "Who used most sources (count only those which are reliable)?"

Perhaps it would be clearer if we said something like, "Whose sources were more reliable?"

It actually does say that, and also specifically states it in the "How to vote" article DDO supplied with this voting system. That is why I can't stand when people vote for who had more. No where anywhere does it say anything about quantity nor do I see any reason that should be considered important. It's just a lazy reason to give someone points in my opinion.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 2:17:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Debaters sometimes use multiple sources to back up a point that is not at issue. That's not helpful. It's the sources relevant to a disputed points that are important.

A source that may seem to be insubstantial, like a blog or obviously biased publication, may give an academic reference for the fact at issue. Judging the source requires checking the actual origin. Wikipedia sometimes has good supporting references; other times they make have unsupported conclusions about the balance of evidence.

Occasionally a source contradicts what the debater says. The debater just didn't understand it.

Sources are important in debate. It's not a storytelling contest.
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 2:34:39 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Spelling/Grammar and Conduct serve a good role as penalty options. If someone is writing in an obviously careless manner without mind to clear communication, it is effective to have the ability to give the other side points. Similarly, if someone is being inappropriate it is good to be able to account for this on the ballot.

Roy makes a good point that source are relevant, but their relevance is incorporated within the evaluation of an argument. An argument often rests on the quality of the evidence presented. If the source is bad, then so is the argument. As many people have pointed out, sources are often not needed for analytical arguments and dont necessarily bear relevance to the quality of the round. This just goes to show that sources are just part of building quality arguments and arent grounds for an independent standard.

Basically, S/G and conduct are behavior related voters- they are justified by the type of community we want. Sources are actually related to the debate itself and so is actually captured under the "arguments" voter.