Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Unfairness in voting

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.
"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
11/28/2011 4:45:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake.
Agreed.
None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

Disagreements on arguments shouldn't certainly mean that "oh, I better give Izbo10 a point"...and I did recall the fact that he did rely on the definition literally to distinguish between belief and knowledge...so.....

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.
"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
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.
"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
11/28/2011 4:57:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.

Proof?
"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
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:04:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

Make it 4. I explained why in my RFD.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.

I did not see such errors in his opponent, while I did see them in his. If both he and his opponent had made those errors, then neither side should be punished. The S&G is not measured against a perfect standard, but against your opponent. It is, "who had better S&G."

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:16:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:04:50 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

Make it 4. I explained why in my RFD.

"my opponent doesn't grasp.." really? Do you feel honest when you do that? I wish I could bring you an example immediately, but language like that is used very often in the debates around here without much attention being paid to it.

This is wrong and you know it. If that comment were written by any other member, you would not have even recognized it as significant,...and if you managed to pay attention to it, it would hardly require a loss of conduct.
"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
11/28/2011 5:17:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:16:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:04:50 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

Make it 4. I explained why in my RFD.

"my opponent doesn't grasp.." really? Do you feel honest when you do that? I wish I could bring you an example immediately, but language like that is used very often in the debates around here without much attention being paid to it.

This is wrong and you know it. If that comment were written by any other member, you would not have even recognized it as significant,...and if you managed to pay attention to it, it would hardly require a loss of conduct.

Please stop asserting.
"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
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:19:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:16:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:04:50 PM, Double_R wrote:
Make it 4. I explained why in my RFD.

"my opponent doesn't grasp.." really? Do you feel honest when you do that? I wish I could bring you an example immediately, but language like that is used very often in the debates around here without much attention being paid to it.

This is wrong and you know it. If that comment were written by any other member, you would not have even recognized it as significant,...and if you managed to pay attention to it, it would hardly require a loss of conduct.

Would you like to defend that statement in a debate?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.

I did not see such errors in his opponent, while I did see them in his. If both he and his opponent had made those errors, then neither side should be punished. The S&G is not measured against a perfect standard, but against your opponent. It is, "who had better S&G."

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?
"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
11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.

I did not see such errors in his opponent, while I did see them in his. If both he and his opponent had made those errors, then neither side should be punished. The S&G is not measured against a perfect standard, but against your opponent. It is, "who had better S&G."

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.
"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
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:30:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.

MIG, he insinuated that having unequal s&g was the basis to deduct s&g. Izbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points. I gave him a scenario in which his theory comes out as ridiculous (only deducting ONE word from the amount Izbo had misspelled (from 2 words to 1)....How does this not match the scenario.

Simply declaring statements for the sake of it does not count as an argument. I could have very well ignored your comment for the unsupported assertion that it is.
"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
11/28/2011 5:33:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:30:51 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.

MIG, he insinuated that having unequal s&g was the basis to deduct s&g. Izbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points. I gave him a scenario in which his theory comes out as ridiculous (only deducting ONE word from the amount Izbo had misspelled (from 2 words to 1)....How does this not match the scenario.

Simply declaring statements for the sake of it does not count as an argument. I could have very well ignored your comment for the unsupported assertion that it is.

"zbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points."
Ahem--> better spelling, especially considering the fact that one spelling mistake would not be as conspicuous as multiple mistakes.

And hmmm....only/about 2? I'd like to see proof for that assertion...
"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
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:36:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:56:57 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:48:38 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

There were some spelling and grammar ("loo" instead of "look" and "yes's" instead of "yeses"). While I agree that there is nothing really to vote against in the form of conduct, there are some in regards to S&G.

I could find such minor typos in yours, mine, Danielle's, and any other member's arguments. That does not constitute a deduction in s&g. It is unfair to hold Izbo to a much more critical and scrutinizing level of judgement in debate just because he's Izbo.

I did not see such errors in his opponent, while I did see them in his. If both he and his opponent had made those errors, then neither side should be punished. The S&G is not measured against a perfect standard, but against your opponent. It is, "who had better S&G."

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

Iabo crosses the threshold of difference. It wasn't a single mispelling in 24,000 characters.

Spelling

"loo" instead of "look"
"yes's" instead of "yeses"

Word choice

"I would start off by thanking my opponent for..." should be, "I will [or would like to] start off by thanking my opponent for..."

"Anything outside that set such as a no or I don't know don't fit in that set." should be "Anything outside that set such as a no or I don't know doesn't fit in that set."

Punctuation

"A theist must answer yes to the question do you believe in god." Should be "A theist must answer yes to the question, "do you believe in god?""

"I don't know is not a yes to the question." should be ""I don't know" is not a yes to the question."

Moving on to something that is not the same mistake over and over...

"See we have the set of all yes's. Anything outside that set such as a no or I don't know don't fit in that set." Should be, "See, we have the set of all yes's. Anything outside that set, such as a no or I don't know, don't fit in that set." (note - this is only looking at grammar mistakes that are not of the same nature as those already presented).

(Also, I don't care too much against modest redundancies, so I didn't mark them)

This is only out of 138 words. Not exactly a super long argument.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:37:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:33:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:30:51 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.

MIG, he insinuated that having unequal s&g was the basis to deduct s&g. Izbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points. I gave him a scenario in which his theory comes out as ridiculous (only deducting ONE word from the amount Izbo had misspelled (from 2 words to 1)....How does this not match the scenario.

Simply declaring statements for the sake of it does not count as an argument. I could have very well ignored your comment for the unsupported assertion that it is.

"zbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points."
Ahem--> better spelling, especially considering the fact that one spelling mistake would not be as conspicuous as multiple mistakes.

And hmmm....only/about 2? I'd like to see proof for that assertion...

"loo" and "yes's" are actually the only ones. 2 spelling mistakes,...oh that is SOO far from and SOO much more conspicuous than 1. This is dishonesty.
"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
11/28/2011 5:38:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:37:30 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:33:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:30:51 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.

MIG, he insinuated that having unequal s&g was the basis to deduct s&g. Izbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points. I gave him a scenario in which his theory comes out as ridiculous (only deducting ONE word from the amount Izbo had misspelled (from 2 words to 1)....How does this not match the scenario.

Simply declaring statements for the sake of it does not count as an argument. I could have very well ignored your comment for the unsupported assertion that it is.

"zbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points."
Ahem--> better spelling, especially considering the fact that one spelling mistake would not be as conspicuous as multiple mistakes.

And hmmm....only/about 2? I'd like to see proof for that assertion...

"loo" and "yes's" are actually the only ones. 2 spelling mistakes,...oh that is SOO far from and SOO much more conspicuous than 1. This is dishonesty.

Ahem, Ore_ele has posted a list of mistakes...How do you respond?
"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
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 5:44:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 5:37:30 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:33:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:30:51 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:23:43 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:20:46 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 11/28/2011 5:09:04 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Do you think that his S&G was just as good as his opponents?

Since when is voting held to such stringent standards? Tell me, when you vote on other people's debates and Pro lets say misspells 1 word in his entire argument, but Con's spelling and grammar is perfect do you take off s&g? .....I mean technically the s&g is not equal, right?

What you just used as an example doesn't seem to match the scenario. Try again, Ike.

MIG, he insinuated that having unequal s&g was the basis to deduct s&g. Izbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points. I gave him a scenario in which his theory comes out as ridiculous (only deducting ONE word from the amount Izbo had misspelled (from 2 words to 1)....How does this not match the scenario.

Simply declaring statements for the sake of it does not count as an argument. I could have very well ignored your comment for the unsupported assertion that it is.

"zbo had about 2 or so words misspelled,....and Ore_ele's argument was that it made the s&g of his opponent greater than his, hence losing Izbo the points."
Ahem--> better spelling, especially considering the fact that one spelling mistake would not be as conspicuous as multiple mistakes.

And hmmm....only/about 2? I'd like to see proof for that assertion...

"loo" and "yes's" are actually the only ones. 2 spelling mistakes,...oh that is SOO far from and SOO much more conspicuous than 1. This is dishonesty.

The question is "Who had better spelling and grammar?". I didn't take points away from Izbo on this one but after re-reading the argument and looking at Ore_ele's comment, I probably should have.

BTW you still haven't answered my question.
TheTruthAnalyst
Posts: 312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 6:29:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.

I'll start with conduct. Izbo did very well, but his first statement was a sarcastic jab at our earlier debate.

"I would start off by thanking my opponent for actually presenting an argument in the opening round."

Spelling and grammar:

I really don't want to have to write it all out. Just to be technically correct there are over two dozen spelling and grammar errors in the remaining arguments.

For arguments, Izbo tried to counter my dictionary-provided definitions with attempting to logically define what words should mean. On top of that, he used about.com and englishclub.com as sources for definitions.
Vote For Truth. Vote For Pie.
Truth-Pie 2012 (member FDIC)
Viper-King
Posts: 4,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 8:05:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Ike. you are right about everything except the spelling and grammar part. Izbo made a ton of spelling errors and you should acknowledge that. Double R is wrong for making Izbo lost conduct.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 9:09:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 8:05:43 PM, Viper-King wrote:
Ike. you are right about everything except the spelling and grammar part. Izbo made a ton of spelling errors and you should acknowledge that. Double R is wrong for making Izbo lost conduct.

Do you have any logic to back that up?
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 9:18:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Izbo's posts in that debate are hard to read. It is a struggle to make out what he intends to convey. He certainly earned the loss of an S&G point.

I say this as one who might be an Izbo supporter if anyone would say what the charges against him are. The fact that I haven't seen the charges prejudices me against the prosecution.

I didn't like having to vote against Izbo in that debate, but it was only appropriate. Giving his opponent the S&G points wasn't hard at all. It wasn't a near thing. Izbo flirted with incoherence. Minimizing this by calling it two spelling errors is ridiculous, uncalled for.
Viper-King
Posts: 4,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 9:21:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 9:09:01 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 11/28/2011 8:05:43 PM, Viper-King wrote:
Ike. you are right about everything except the spelling and grammar part. Izbo made a ton of spelling errors and you should acknowledge that. Double R is wrong for making Izbo lost conduct.

Do you have any logic to back that up?

Yes I do because I'm not a troll. This is not personal because I whatsoever don't have a positive or negative view for you for now. People use "my opponent doesn't grasp" and other stuff like that all the time in debates. It is not lowering the opponent but saying that the opponent doesn't understand this when I'm talking about something else.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 11:31:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 9:21:13 PM, Viper-King wrote:
Yes I do because I'm not a troll. This is not personal because I whatsoever don't have a positive or negative view for you for now. People use "my opponent doesn't grasp" and other stuff like that all the time in debates. It is not lowering the opponent but saying that the opponent doesn't understand this when I'm talking about something else.

I am not taking it personally, this is a debate site. Saying "Double_R is wrong" should be followed with some reasoning as to why.

First of all it doesn't matter what other people do. Two wrongs do not make a right. I am not going to ignore a violation of conduct because other members sometimes get away with it.

Second, there is a big difference between saying that someone doesn't "understand…" and someone doesn't "grasp…". "Understand" is used in more of a sense of ignorance. As in doesn't know something. We are all ignorant, so this is not really an insult. "Grasp" is used more in a sense of having the ability to understand or retain. Saying that someone does not have the ability to understand or retain is basically calling them stupid.

Now, even if you disagree with my interpretation of the definitions, saying "my opponent doesn't understand" is still a violation of conduct in that the debater is attacking the opponent instead of the argument. This is very intellectually dishonest because it be little's the opponent and makes the reader feel like the offenders argument is better without him even addressing the argument actually made. In some cases this can be overlooked but Izbo did it right in the first paragraph of his last round, making his statement loud and clear while giving his opponent no chance to respond to that claim.

Also, if it was a 4 round 8,000 character per round debate then it would have played a much smaller role in the debate, but this debate was very short, making it a larger aspect which justifies taking away the point.
deamonomic
Posts: 121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2011 11:59:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/28/2011 4:40:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
In light of the heightened controversy over Izbo, I'd like to point out one more, in my opinion, grossly unjust act of opposition that members do without any kind of remonstration.

http://www.debate.org...

The debate above contains 7 votes in favor of Izbo's opponent. 3 of those voters actually went so far as to take off Conduct or Spelling and Grammar.....but if you read Izbo's argument it had not 1 word of insult or profanity, and it had not one serious spelling or grammar mistake. None of them gave him arguments even though, as a voter, I would think "I don't know" wouldn't qualify as an answer to a question on what you believe ("I don't know" being an answer on knowledge).

A certain band of people have magnified Izbo into a status of uselessness that is not actually so.
have you ever considered that just because a person votes wrongly it is not done so on purpose? is it not possible that they saw flaw in there when in reality they were simply looking at it wrong?

in my opinion tho, i dont think that spelling or grammar really matter in the grand scheme of things, if you can read whats there and understand it without having a very difficult time doing so what does it really matter in the end? the point of the discussion got across. Again the exception being that their spelling or grammar being so utterly horrible that you can not make heads or tails of what they are saying or have to struggle to do so.
I would gladly lose a million times over then win by cheating once.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2011 5:55:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
What I dislike is the fact that they conveniently all get so knit-picky when its Izbo's debate. Its not mere innocent detection of errors. Its a malicious and deliberate way to bring him down while still justified by the technicalities of voting. If you need proof, just go look at Mr. Infidel's, weirdman, and lordknuckle's RFDs.

Its like having a certain rule and only holding certain people to it. Sure, technically they should be following that rule without discrepancy, but it seemed understood that the rule was not a serious one,....it seemed understood that the rule was not taken to such stringent heights for other members.

Justify all you want, because technically you're right, but the honest truth, which you ARE aware of, is that what you all did had a certain unfair motivation (and I can ESPECIALLY say this to anyone that took off conduct) and that is contemptible.
"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
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2011 12:17:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/29/2011 5:55:53 AM, 000ike wrote:
What I dislike is the fact that they conveniently all get so knit-picky when its Izbo's debate. Its not mere innocent detection of errors. Its a malicious and deliberate way to bring him down while still justified by the technicalities of voting. If you need proof, just go look at Mr. Infidel's, weirdman, and lordknuckle's RFDs.

Its like having a certain rule and only holding certain people to it. Sure, technically they should be following that rule without discrepancy, but it seemed understood that the rule was not a serious one,....it seemed understood that the rule was not taken to such stringent heights for other members.

Justify all you want, because technically you're right, but the honest truth, which you ARE aware of, is that what you all did had a certain unfair motivation (and I can ESPECIALLY say this to anyone that took off conduct) and that is contemptible.

What annoys me is when someone claims that they are right about an issue while having no facts or valid reasoning to back it up... on a debate site. You can accuse the other voters of intentional bias all you want. If you are going to claim in a public forum that I did so, then have a real reason.

Just so you know, I only voted in that debate as a response to this thread. I did so because I hate when people give unjustified votes regardless of who it is and was actually planning on voting for Izbo, just like I did in his last debate. After his first argument I thought he was winning and that you were onto something. Then came his last round...