Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Abusing the S/G, conduct and sources vote

phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2012 11:05:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I assert that the above voting points are not for who displayed a better use of them in the debate. People give the S&G point simply because one side had a few more minor flaws in that area. Those votes are not for who did better in them but should only be reserved for when one side displayed a significantly poor use of them. The argument points are used differently. They are always for whoever on balance debated better. The only time they are tied is if the voter honestly thinks they were the same, or if he cannot make up his mind. The other points however, should not be used in the same way. Mainly because they are not nearly as relevant as the argument points. They're secondary voting points. They should only be used at the more extreme times. If con made five spelling mistakes while pro made 9, that does not mean con should get the spelling point.

Therefore, unlike the argument points, S/G, conduct and sources should only be reserved for the more extreme scenarios.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 12:22:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 12:12:31 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Yeah, it is pretty much a given. I wonder who disagreed with it.

Mostly newer members but other not so new as well. Some people throw out those points without reallizing they're not supposed to be used the same way as the argument points. Thought I'd just post a thread on it.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 12:52:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think with the voting categories, everyone has a slightly different opinion on how they work. Here's how I do it. For the very vast majority of debates where it was a close decision, I only vote on arguments and ignore the other categories. However, if a member forfeited or had overwhelming poor conduct, I'd dock the conduct point. If one member had very poor spelling, grammar or general presentation or if the other member had organized his argument extremely well, I'd deduct/award the SG point. For sources, I only vote on them if I actually read the sources in question. They won't affect the arguments points since that is only based on the argument. But if a great source is integrated well into the debate, giving sources points is fair game. This especially becomes relevant when both debaters argue about the validity of their respective sources.
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 1:43:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hmm, I think the sources vote means more than S/G and conduct, but only when you're dealing with debates that require sources. It's not that big of a deal with philosophy and such, but especially with history, politics, economics, science, etc., I do think the sources point matters.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 1:49:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I always put poor spelling if a sentence becomes a pain to translate. For example the spelling of:

"This sentenc is grammatically correct, and is not really a big ain to read, and you can guess what is trying to be said is adequate enough to allow one to not dock marks for - although if the terrible spelling keeps up it may be worthy of losing the spelling and grammar mark". -- OK

"This is that which is ok to read plausibly once you have read the previous, but at in on beginning of a paragraph, it is it confuses any attempt to read it to the point of illegibility." -- That would, if a clash point, be worthy of losing the S&G mark.
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...
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 1:49:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 1:43:53 AM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Hmm, I think the sources vote means more than S/G and conduct, but only when you're dealing with debates that require sources. It's not that big of a deal with philosophy and such, but especially with history, politics, economics, science, etc., I do think the sources point matters.

Sources matter allot more than just for points. If you provide no source or a very poor source for an argument that require one, then the voters will have no reason to accept your argument. This can be a very big loss for the debater. Thus, even if they don't lose the source point it still has a large effect on the argument point.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 1:49:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The difficulty is correctly getting ambiguities and not just lack of foreknowledge/general knowledge.
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...
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 1:53:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 1:49:26 AM, phantom wrote:
At 6/26/2012 1:43:53 AM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
Hmm, I think the sources vote means more than S/G and conduct, but only when you're dealing with debates that require sources. It's not that big of a deal with philosophy and such, but especially with history, politics, economics, science, etc., I do think the sources point matters.

Sources matter allot more than just for points. If you provide no source or a very poor source for an argument that require one, then the voters will have no reason to accept your argument. This can be a very big loss for the debater. Thus, even if they don't lose the source point it still has a large effect on the argument point.

I see your point. I don't really know what I'm talking about anyway.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 2:44:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
There are few things more annoying on this site than the sources vote. If you use arguments that do not require sources, and your opponent does, then you will lose the source vote, even if your sources were equally reliable. People just count up the links and vote based on that, even though not all links are created equal, and not all links are sources, and not all sources are links. In my opinion, the sources vote should be permanently deleted from this site.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 2:51:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Sources, S&G, and conduct are important aspects of a debate to judge but they are so often used improperly and cause problems in good quality debates. I feel that a partial solution would be to increase arguments to 4 points, with the extra point coming from the source vote. The question of who used more reliable sources is a very subjective question and in many cases one side may have better sources but not enough to justify awarding them 2 points, especially considering that arguments only counts for 3.
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 4:44:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/25/2012 11:05:32 PM, phantom wrote:
I assert that the above voting points are not for who displayed a better use of them in the debate. People give the S&G point simply because one side had a few more minor flaws in that area. Those votes are not for who did better in them but should only be reserved for when one side displayed a significantly poor use of them. The argument points are used differently. They are always for whoever on balance debated better. The only time they are tied is if the voter honestly thinks they were the same, or if he cannot make up his mind. The other points however, should not be used in the same way. Mainly because they are not nearly as relevant as the argument points. They're secondary voting points. They should only be used at the more extreme times. If con made five spelling mistakes while pro made 9, that does not mean con should get the spelling point.

Therefore, unlike the argument points, S/G, conduct and sources should only be reserved for the more extreme scenarios.

It's functionally up to the voter to decide how to avail themselves to leverage the various point selections on a ballot. Some people have different conceptions of what is or isn't a legitimate use. It's almost amusing how many calls for voting reform show up now and again. I used to be one of them (I might do it again, who knows). Noting is going to change on here though.

At this point votes and RFD's tell you what a judge saw in a debate that stood out to them, and some people see things others don't, some people look over things that others don't, and some people miss the train altogether.

In my general experience, there are some tricks that tend to generally get voters to vote for you. For example, in the final round, explaining why one's arguments are superior to another and what impact that has on the BOP does generally tend to be effective. Others structure their arguments as simply as possible, so that even a toddler could understand them. That tends to work especially well. Many appeal to the values of their "constituency." That is -I think- the most effective. If you don't do at least one of these things, then you're pretty much sure to loose a debate -as it will be judged on DDO- because very few people can actually follow a complex argument through to a conclusion. Some can. That is a rare talent though.

If a judge doesn't understand what you were saying, then they aren't going to vote for you. If a judge doesn't understand what the resolution is about, then they are going to vote based on the way they feel (probably without even realizing it). If a judge comes from a background that your argument spits in the face of, then you're very likely not going to get their vote.

But there is a recognizable difference between rhetoric and debate. Debate is a test challenge of offering the superior argument. Rhetoric is an exercise of persuading others. Sure, rhetoric often employs arguments, but individual persuasion has no bearing on debate. The problem though, is that the test of the superior argument -at least in normative terms- by a lay judge, is often the one that they could most easily grasp, that they can connect with, or identify with.

If a judge doesn't like your argument... or they don't understand it, or can't connect with it... chances are they will look for a reason to justify their institution that you "lost." Spelling/rule violations can often serve that purpose.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 9:10:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I think debate is about more than having a winning argument, it is about having an understandable winning argument. If S&G distracts from following the debate, and one side is worse than the other, then the better S&G ought to be rewarded.

Bad conduct distracts from the debate. The reader is investing time in reading the debate. Insults, forfeits, and failure to address the topic are wasting the reader's time. Every competition has rules to keep the game going well.

Some topics don't require sources. Pure philosophical topics usually don't require sources, at least not beyond attributing quotations. But most topics deal with facts, and sources are important in establishing the facts. It isn't the number of sources, it's the reliability of the sources in establishing facts relevant to the case. If anything, sources are not ranked highly enough in judging debates.
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 9:58:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 9:10:41 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
Some topics don't require sources. Pure philosophical topics usually don't require sources, at least not beyond attributing quotations. But most topics deal with facts, and sources are important in establishing the facts. It isn't the number of sources, it's the reliability of the sources in establishing facts relevant to the case. If anything, sources are not ranked highly enough in judging debates.

I 100% agree.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 10:13:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/25/2012 11:05:32 PM, phantom wrote:
I assert that the above voting points are not for who displayed a better use of them in the debate. People give the S&G point simply because one side had a few more minor flaws in that area. Those votes are not for who did better in them but should only be reserved for when one side displayed a significantly poor use of them. The argument points are used differently. They are always for whoever on balance debated better. The only time they are tied is if the voter honestly thinks they were the same, or if he cannot make up his mind. The other points however, should not be used in the same way. Mainly because they are not nearly as relevant as the argument points. They're secondary voting points. They should only be used at the more extreme times. If con made five spelling mistakes while pro made 9, that does not mean con should get the spelling point.

Therefore, unlike the argument points, S/G, conduct and sources should only be reserved for the more extreme scenarios.

You're preaching to the choir here. The only people that would abuse conduct and S/G do it because they're votebombers, not because they honestly don't know how to use the points appropriately.
"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
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 10:42:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 2:44:47 AM, mongeese wrote:
There are few things more annoying on this site than the sources vote. If you use arguments that do not require sources, and your opponent does, then you will lose the source vote, even if your sources were equally reliable. People just count up the links and vote based on that, even though not all links are created equal, and not all links are sources, and not all sources are links. In my opinion, the sources vote should be permanently deleted from this site.

Why permanently delete the sources vote just because some users are unable to comprehend what it means? We are basically going down to their level.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 10:52:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 10:13:23 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 6/25/2012 11:05:32 PM, phantom wrote:
I assert that the above voting points are not for who displayed a better use of them in the debate. People give the S&G point simply because one side had a few more minor flaws in that area. Those votes are not for who did better in them but should only be reserved for when one side displayed a significantly poor use of them. The argument points are used differently. They are always for whoever on balance debated better. The only time they are tied is if the voter honestly thinks they were the same, or if he cannot make up his mind. The other points however, should not be used in the same way. Mainly because they are not nearly as relevant as the argument points. They're secondary voting points. They should only be used at the more extreme times. If con made five spelling mistakes while pro made 9, that does not mean con should get the spelling point.

Therefore, unlike the argument points, S/G, conduct and sources should only be reserved for the more extreme scenarios.

You're preaching to the choir here. The only people that would abuse conduct and S/G do it because they're votebombers, not because they honestly don't know how to use the points appropriately.

Not true at all. There are many voters who read the debate but also improperly use the non argument points without knowing they are. It's mainly newer members but I'm hoping that some will see this thread.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2012 11:18:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/26/2012 10:42:11 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 6/26/2012 2:44:47 AM, mongeese wrote:
There are few things more annoying on this site than the sources vote. If you use arguments that do not require sources, and your opponent does, then you will lose the source vote, even if your sources were equally reliable. People just count up the links and vote based on that, even though not all links are created equal, and not all links are sources, and not all sources are links. In my opinion, the sources vote should be permanently deleted from this site.

Why permanently delete the sources vote just because some users are unable to comprehend what it means? We are basically going down to their level.

True, although how effective would a reform of voting be, especially with the need to disperse information regarding how to view the function of sources in a debate?
"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