Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

L-M Classic Judging Paradigms

ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2009 12:40:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
#1. patsox834
#2. wjmelements
#3. rougeagent21
#4. MTGandP
#5. burningpuppies
#6. pcmbrown
#7. feverish
#8. ccstate4peat

I invite the judges to post their paradigms!
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2009 5:22:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Nice word paradigm. Reminds me of paradiddle.

MTG posted these judging guidelines which have been used on several DDO UTW debates:
Conduct: In addition to normal conduct, whoever follows the rules most effectively gets the vote.
S&G: Vote as usual.
Arguments: Give the vote to whoever proves most effectively that their team would win.
Sources: Since sources don't really matter, give the vote to whoever proves most effectively that their team would win.

I think I will be influenced by this system but the unique nature of the tournament should be considered. In particular the limits placed on character selection. LM posted this:

All debaters are free to argue against their opponent's interpretation of their characters or that their opponent's team is not following the rules (such as two mandatory street levelers or that one person on their team may be on par with Dr. manhattan or anyone along those lines). Whether or not this argument leads one to concluding certain characters on their opponents team should be disqualified is entirely up to the debater as well as the judges (who are merely voting off of who provides the more compelling argument).

I personally have issues with some team selections which I feel are contrary to the rules but I will not be raising these questions myself when I am judging, only if I am competing against such a team myself.
I will consider it the job of debaters to challenge such matters and if a strong argument is given for why a character should not be included this will of course affect the outcome of the battle as a whole, not just the conduct/rules category.
Judges who are not taking part may of course choose to approach this differently.

As far as sources go, I will not consider them unless they are critical to the debate, for example if a superpower is shown to be misrepresented in one source by referring to a more reliable source about the character (same canon of course).

Hope that all makes sense.
pcmbrown
Posts: 198
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 11:20:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Conduct: Entering an illegal character, or posting strategies which violate a rule constitute losses. Obviously, typical standards of conduct apply also.
S&G: Fairly obvious.
Arg: If a character is disqualified, and your strategy depends upon said character, you lose. If two contradictory sources are used, the more logical one wins.
Sources: Logical sources over POS. Otherwise, greatest number of applicable sources wins.
"Did I shock you with this discovery.? Of curse not..!!"-banker
iamadragon
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 11:27:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Considering how whether or not a character is illegal or violates a rule or whatever is going to be an extremely controversial topic, that seems to be an unfair way to lose conduct.

That's like saying, for a debate on any topic, "whoever posts an argument that gets completely refuted loses conduct... for not posting a good argument."
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 1:17:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I agree. A person who is found to have an illegal character should just lose that character, but the rest of the debate should continue normally, and if the person agrees that his character is illegal after being presented with evidence, then that wouldn't be poor conduct at all.
patsox834
Posts: 406
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 3:22:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Conduct: I dunno, I was planning on looking at it as I normally would. You know, paying attention for douchebaggery.

Spelling and grammar: Do I really need to explain?

Arguments: Whoever does the best job showing their team would win.

Sources: This is a little tricky. All else being equal, it'll go to the person who gets the points for arguments -- but if one person ends up using a sh-t-load of good, relevant sources, and another only uses them to specify his canons, or whatever, then the former gets my vote.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 3:29:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/21/2009 12:40:58 PM, ToastOfDestiny wrote:
#1. patsox834
#2. wjmelements
#3. rougeagent21
#4. MTGandP
#5. burningpuppies
#6. pcmbrown
#7. feverish
#8. ccstate4peat

I invite the judges to post their paradigms!

No.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 3:41:37 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I'll judge fairly, but if you're sitting there reading all of this nervously, you get too worried about things. Just relax. I don't see how us announcing out criteria affects your Wars.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 5:02:09 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
By the way, when I decided a while ago (I think it was in Maikuru vs. MTGandP) that conduct should be given to whoever follows the rules, it is not because it is bad conduct to break the rules. It just seemed like conduct and rules were in the same general category, and there should be at least one point given for following the rules.

My own judging paradigm:
Whoever proves that their team will win obviously gets the vote. However, the winner's victory must be in accordance with the relevant rules.
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 5:45:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/25/2009 5:27:20 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
What do you mean by "relevant?"

Some rules are not relevant to the fight. For example, "The PRO side must challenge his/her opponent by whatever deadline is posted for a round to have started. If they don't, they automatically forfeit the debate." This rule has nothing to do with the fight itself.
rougeagent21
Posts: 80
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/25/2009 6:59:35 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I agree with wjelements. The only paradigm I will give is that I will make sure that the team that effectively defeats the other team will win the points of better arguments. Do not worry about everything else too much. Have fun, play fair, be courteous, relax.
"I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country." -Gen. Patton
burningpuppies101
Posts: 1,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 12:13:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Burningpuppies101 Paradigms:

Conduct:

I don't want to hear sarcasm. It only makes you look bad, since half the time the sarcasm only backfires. If you make a sarcastic comment about how your opponent has no warrant, and your comment has no warrant... It only makes you look bad and it has no place in the round. I want to hear polite comments. Be nice to each other.

S/G: Self explanatory, but you should all learn how to you use spell check. If I can't read what you're typing, I won't read it. I'll just look at what your opponent says next.

Arguments:

I don't know how many times I see people say, this isn't true because of reason X, Y, and Z. But then they move on. YOU NEED TO FULLY REFUTE SOMEONE'S ARGUMENT. MEANING, I WANT TO SEE WARRANTS. I want to see weighing of the arguments. I want to see the debaters saying, this argument is more important in the round because of reason A, B, C. Just make sure you warrant everything you say.

Extensions should be clean cut, no messiness. I want to see good signposting, good answers to the refutation, etc.

Sources:
Wikipedia is fine in this tournament, but make sure your sources are clean cut. I don't want to see misquoting. I also don't want to see debaters telling the judge, you should read further in this site that I posted the link to for more information. I refuse to read those links. All i'm looking at in the round is what is in the round, nothing more. The other side of this is that if your opponent finds out that your source is bad and points it out, then I might look into it, but at that point, you're pretty much screwed in terms of rep in the debate

Since this is a UTW style debate, here's how I will look at the resolution:

Resolved: In a fight in New York City, Team A would be able to defeat Team B.

I want to hear creative arguments, none of that stock , 'No, you're wrong. 'no, you're wrong' 'no, you're wrong.'

If you have any questions, just message me.
Omnes te moriturum amant 

http://www.debate.org...
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 1:58:20 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/26/2009 12:13:36 AM, burningpuppies101 wrote:
stuff

In that case would you expect ever single piece of equipment and nuance of ability detailed in the character bio - or is it ok to make them less than novel like and provide sourced info as you go along?
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 1:58:56 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/26/2009 1:58:20 AM, Puck wrote:
At 7/26/2009 12:13:36 AM, burningpuppies101 wrote:
stuff

In that case would you expect ever single piece of equipment and nuance of ability detailed in the character bio - or is it ok to make them less than novel like and provide sourced info as you go along?

*every*
pcmbrown
Posts: 198
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 12:02:19 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/25/2009 11:27:51 AM, iamadragon wrote:
Considering how whether or not a character is illegal or violates a rule or whatever is going to be an extremely controversial topic, that seems to be an unfair way to lose conduct.

That's like saying, for a debate on any topic, "whoever posts an argument that gets completely refuted loses conduct... for not posting a good argument."

true, seeing as all characters fit the rules to some extent, strike the first part of my conduct judging
"Did I shock you with this discovery.? Of curse not..!!"-banker
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 12:38:47 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Question to other judges: If a team breaks a rule and the other person doesn't point it out, should we count it as a rule break?
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/26/2009 3:50:48 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/26/2009 12:38:47 PM, MTGandP wrote:
Question to other judges: If a team breaks a rule and the other person doesn't point it out, should we count it as a rule break?

I think not, although all judges should of course vote how they decide best.
This is kind of what I was saying in my first post. I won't consider a rule break unless it is mentioned in the debate.
burningpuppies101
Posts: 1,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2009 3:44:18 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/26/2009 12:38:47 PM, MTGandP wrote:
Question to other judges: If a team breaks a rule and the other person doesn't point it out, should we count it as a rule break?

I won't. I won't do any of the argumentation for the debaters
Omnes te moriturum amant 

http://www.debate.org...
burningpuppies101
Posts: 1,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2009 3:45:45 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 7/26/2009 1:58:56 AM, Puck wrote:
At 7/26/2009 1:58:20 AM, Puck wrote:
At 7/26/2009 12:13:36 AM, burningpuppies101 wrote:
stuff

In that case would you expect ever single piece of equipment and nuance of ability detailed in the character bio - or is it ok to make them less than novel like and provide sourced info as you go along?

*every*

I think it would be a good idea to talk briefly about all the things your player will be using. I'm fine with using one of the rounds of the debate to just clarify what the players can do. So just make it a 4 round debate, with Round one talking about what each individual can do on your team. I don't like going through links.
Omnes te moriturum amant 

http://www.debate.org...
burningpuppies101
Posts: 1,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 1:28:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Just a side note:

From the debates I've seen, most of you don't like using all your characters. I've read debates where one side just focuses on one single character and his/her/its abilities, and forgets about everyone else on their team. If you didnt intend on using all your characters, then you shouldn't have chosen those people.
Omnes te moriturum amant 

http://www.debate.org...
MTGandP
Posts: 702
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 3:04:53 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/3/2009 1:28:33 PM, burningpuppies101 wrote:
Just a side note:

From the debates I've seen, most of you don't like using all your characters. I've read debates where one side just focuses on one single character and his/her/its abilities, and forgets about everyone else on their team. If you didnt intend on using all your characters, then you shouldn't have chosen those people.

Due to circumstances, one or more characters end up being pretty much useless.
iamadragon
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 3:09:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 8/3/2009 1:28:33 PM, burningpuppies101 wrote:
Just a side note:

From the debates I've seen, most of you don't like using all your characters. I've read debates where one side just focuses on one single character and his/her/its abilities, and forgets about everyone else on their team. If you didnt intend on using all your characters, then you shouldn't have chosen those people.

Seriously, what is with all your garbage? Stop being so damn stuck up.

Think for a second. If all characters are going to be defeated except one, then you should only focus on that one. Heck, if you've found one strategy that you think is unbeatable and revolves around one character, then you only have to focus on that.

I'm incredibly sick of your getting worked up and complaining and adding things that irrelevant to actual debating on your paradigm.

Ridiculous.
iamadragon
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 6:17:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Not really. Highly consider what I just said. Not only do I not care, but I'm sure burningpuppies101 has already sent in his RFD, possibly with a beeeeach-like complaint about how I only used one character or two characters, or how you only used one character or two characters, or how we didn't quote each other in a format he likes, or some irrelevant, pedantic thing.

PS–the only reason I suggested the rudeness thing was in a comical attempt to devise a strategy with MTGandP in the UTW.
sherlockmethod
Posts: 317
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2009 7:18:26 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
burningpuppies left a great RFD for our debate and I thank him for it. The judges are in a compitition also, he is only doing what he thinks is best. I learned a lot from his RFD.
Library cards: Stopping stupid one book at a time.