Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Debate Judges

Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 7:59:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I am uncertain if anyone has had this discussion many years ago, but I thought I would petition it of Innomen.

I would like to pose a Judge system, to overlap not eliminate, the current voting system.
The Judge would be a person who passed a confirmation process that shows that person to have a certain level of knowledge of debate, logic, and rhetoric. (Through a DDO test of some sort).

These judges votes would represent more points than an "audience" vote. Typically an audience vote will be one of picking sides rather than giving quality feedback to the debaters.

A judge can delineate the merits of the debate rather than the merits of the position. I think this would add value to the long term users and avoid the problems of "bandwagon" voting.

Thoughts?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 8:05:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Sounds like a great idea. However, I don't want to sound pessimistic, but since I've come here, numerous ideas have been proposed to improve the quality of the site. I have not seen a single one of them implemented, or championed beyond the 1 or 2 days their proposition threads were conceived.
"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
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 10:31:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Third this!

Though, it will never happen. :(
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
BlackVoid
Posts: 9,170
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 10:48:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/11/2012 8:05:32 PM, 000ike wrote:
Sounds like a great idea. However, I don't want to sound pessimistic, but since I've come here, numerous ideas have been proposed to improve the quality of the site. I have not seen a single one of them implemented, or championed beyond the 1 or 2 days their proposition threads were conceived.

This. We haven't had an update since...I don't even know.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 11:19:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I propose an option where you can create a debate and only allow certain people to vote on it. Of course this has to be agreed to by both Pro and Con, some one can't just stack the deck and only allow their buddies to vote.

Elite voters for elite debates in elite debates.
"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
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 11:36:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/11/2012 11:19:37 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
I propose an option where you can create a debate and only allow certain people to vote on it. Of course this has to be agreed to by both Pro and Con, some one can't just stack the deck and only allow their buddies to vote.

Elite voters for elite debates in elite debates.

How exactly would this be enforced?
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 11:39:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I like having the freedom to vote on debates. This is a horrible Idea.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/11/2012 11:43:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/11/2012 11:36:44 PM, THEBOMB wrote:
At 2/11/2012 11:19:37 PM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
I propose an option where you can create a debate and only allow certain people to vote on it. Of course this has to be agreed to by both Pro and Con, some one can't just stack the deck and only allow their buddies to vote.

Elite voters for elite debates in elite debates.

How exactly would this be enforced?

It would be a debate option when a debate is created, just like the option of how long the debate is per round and voting period.
"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
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 4:12:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/11/2012 11:39:57 PM, TUF wrote:
I like having the freedom to vote on debates. This is a horrible Idea.

Agreed. I would think that the ability for these "judges" to REMOVE votes from a specific system would work quite well, so there are less VBers.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 10:00:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Having better judges is a worthy goal, but trying to qualify them would not work. First, it's too much effort to expect DDO members to carry out. It's too expensive for the site owner to staff. People come here to debate, not to run a bureaucracy. Second, the most ideological members would be motivated to jump through all the hoops to become official judges. They would then know all the rules and terminology and then use the knowledge to support their ideology -- while being completely sincere.

The best way to improve the quality of judging is to try to do one's best in writing good RFDs. That teaches by example.
Hardcore.Pwnography
Posts: 4,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 10:11:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 10:00:12 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
Having better judges is a worthy goal, but trying to qualify them would not work. First, it's too much effort to expect DDO members to carry out. It's too expensive for the site owner to staff. People come here to debate, not to run a bureaucracy. Second, the most ideological members would be motivated to jump through all the hoops to become official judges. They would then know all the rules and terminology and then use the knowledge to support their ideology -- while being completely sincere.

The best way to improve the quality of judging is to try to do one's best in writing good RFDs. That teaches by example.

The judges wouldn't be paid. It is a voluntary position.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 10:56:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 10:11:44 AM, Hardcore.Pwnography wrote:

The judges wouldn't be paid. It is a voluntary position.

As with moderators, there are two ways of doing it either it's the site staff or volunteers. It's too much work for volunteers.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 2:16:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Without the manipulation of the voting per se, this could be implemented, but I wouldn't endorse it for a variety of reasons.

Learning to aptly judge is as important as actual debating. I don't like the exclusivity of a 'judged' debate, but that's just me.

I also know that the job would be crappy. The demand on the judges would be pretty fierce and after a very short time I can almost guarantee they will opt out of that job. I've been constantly solicited to vote when I became pres, and got modding abilities., and at first I did, and then it just got too much, and now I rarely judge. People will never agree with your RFD, and it will just get to be more trouble than it's worth.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 2:17:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 10:00:12 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
Having better judges is a worthy goal, but trying to qualify them would not work. First, it's too much effort to expect DDO members to carry out. It's too expensive for the site owner to staff. People come here to debate, not to run a bureaucracy. Second, the most ideological members would be motivated to jump through all the hoops to become official judges. They would then know all the rules and terminology and then use the knowledge to support their ideology -- while being completely sincere.

The best way to improve the quality of judging is to try to do one's best in writing good RFDs. That teaches by example.

And then of course there is this too.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 4:04:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 2:16:55 PM, innomen wrote:
Without the manipulation of the voting per se, this could be implemented, but I wouldn't endorse it for a variety of reasons.

Learning to aptly judge is as important as actual debating. I don't like the exclusivity of a 'judged' debate, but that's just me.
This definitely. I will say from experience this is vital to not just learning to judge in itself but learning how people judge, and how you want a debater to debate, specifically informs people on what to do.
I also know that the job would be crappy.
Hmm...
The demand on the judges would be pretty fierce and after a very short time I can almost guarantee they will opt out of that job. I've been constantly solicited to vote when I became pres, and got modding abilities., and at first I did, and then it just got too much, and now I rarely judge. People will never agree with your RFD, and it will just get to be more trouble than it's worth.

I understand this point, but if it was used sparingly (appointed judges for 'major' debates, e.g. tournaments maybe?), it would work imo.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 4:07:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Lol, there are a lot of authoritarians on this site.

You know, you can't really force a mode of entertainment to be more to your liking by imposing rules on it. You'll eventually turn it into something else that I'm sure, far less people (if anyone else) would be interested in.

If that's not a contention for you, then why don't you guys create another site? Wouldn't take long, and you can make it exactly as you like.

Hell, didn't the AnCappers do it?
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 4:12:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/11/2012 7:59:52 PM, Gileandos wrote:
I would like to pose a Judge system, to overlap not eliminate, the current voting system.
The Judge would be a person who passed a confirmation process that shows that person to have a certain level of knowledge of debate, logic, and rhetoric. (Through a DDO test of some sort).

These judges votes would represent more points than an "audience" vote. Typically an audience vote will be one of picking sides rather than giving quality feedback to the debaters.

A judge can delineate the merits of the debate rather than the merits of the position. I think this would add value to the long term users and avoid the problems of "bandwagon" voting.

Thoughts?

A major issue with this system besides those mentioned by Roy and Innomen, is that it basically reduces the votes made by anyone other then a "judge" as unimportant. Not only because of the idea of making their points count for more, but also because of the way the judges would be chosen. Tests are created as a means of separating those that are qualified from those that are not. Therefore anyone who does not pass is basically being considered by the site as "unworthy" of voting. This would likely reduce the number of votes from the already low turnout most debates currently receive.

If we want to improve the quality of voting, then we need to find a positive source of encouragement, not a negative one such as restrictions or requirements. One idea I have thought of somewhat simmilar to yours would be a reward system where members would vote on the best judges (say once every six months, in a format similar to the elections), the winners would be recognized officially through the site as "Top Voters". The title would appear under their avatar in the voting columns, very similar to the way "Top Contributor" shows up in yahoo.answers, or "Moderator" in other forums. I think something like that would definitely be noticed, and entice a lot of members to put more time into their RFD's. If implemented correctly this would and also raise the standard by giving those new to the site a better idea of who to learn from.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2012 7:42:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The list of approved judges that no one has ever had any problems with would be pretty short. While I respect a ton of members on this site as judges, the only person who I think *no one* has ever complained about (from my list) is Maikuru.

Gileandos (the threads OP) would not be welcome to judge on any of my debates after the way he conducted himself in our Jesus debate and in voting on my debate with innomen, so I find this whole thread ironic.

Regardless, standardized testing can't test objectivity which is the most important standard for judging.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2012 10:42:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 2/12/2012 7:42:13 PM, bluesteel wrote:
The list of approved judges that no one has ever had any problems with would be pretty short. While I respect a ton of members on this site as judges, the only person who I think *no one* has ever complained about (from my list) is Maikuru.

Gileandos (the threads OP) would not be welcome to judge on any of my debates after the way he conducted himself in our Jesus debate and in voting on my debate with innomen, so I find this whole thread ironic.:
This
Regardless, standardized testing can't test objectivity which is the most important standard for judging.
Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/13/2012 10:44:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
To add to this, perhaps the Debate Judges (since they are unbiased non-vBombers) are the votes that actually count toward the winner--and the audience votes are for fun points to see what the other audience thinks,.
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler