Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

OFFICIAL: Response to Upcoming Launch

SObszanski
Posts: 102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 2:37:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Hello, DDO Community!

I want to first introduce myself to you. My name is Suzanne Obszanski, and I have been an employee of Juggle for over two years. I have been working the past several weeks with Mike and company to help roll out new phases of DDO to improve your community.

Over the past week, I have been aggregating your feedback regarding "quick debates" and am looking to clarify some questions, comments and concerns as we work to perfect our design and show comps to you.

To clarify, the overall goal of the "quick debates" is to reduce the bounce rate of new members and create a lower barrier to entry. By no means does "quick" = "lousy." Accomplishing this mandates the need to reduce intimidation levels of new users by teaching and molding them. This is where you, our DDO experts, will come into play!

The launch of quick debates will be multiple phases, wherein Phase 1 (initial release) is an iteration that can and will receive improvements based upon user experiences, use cases and your valuable feedback. We believe in the site and the DDO community; however, we also realize it needs improvement. We are very much looking forward to building something that you will enjoy.
Based on your feedback (from post: http://www.debate.org...), I have compiled a list of questions that we want your help answering.

Question 1: Who creates the debate topics?
From Debateorg.blogspot.com - Make sure that the debates made are by 'higher' people. I don't mean Juggle, but just some way that noobs don't make them - or the new ones can be easily deleted. Or hidden away. Or something. Just in a way that we don't have eightysix and two thirds of debates on "Does God exist" and eight thousand on "Socialism is bad".

For Phase 1, we will create ONE core issue for the debate topics per day (with the help of higher-level DDO community members). We want to understand adoption rates, retention and other metrics prior to opening the creation of debate topics to other members of the community, should that be the direction you see this going.

USER: Stephen_Hawkins says, "The majority of this site's users are people who just come on for a week or two, post a pointlessly bad argument, then leave. This seems to be a way of attracting new users, which is fine, but not retaining them, which is a million times more important as of now."

The goal of Quick Debates is definitely to attract new users; however, retention is key. By creating just one topic per day, it is our hope to create worthwhile, well thought out core issues to help attract new debaters while not watering down the application with worthless topics that cause it to lose value.

Question 2: What is the time period?
In looking at the periods below, we would like to get your feedback on how long you envision each lasting? Does the entire debate take 1 day, 2 days, 3 days or even 1 week? Does each round have a specific time period attached to it? If so, what are your ideas for each?

Period 1 – Argument Period. In this round, you will choose a side and offer up an argument to support your stance. To encourage original thought, other members of the DDO community will not be able to view your argument until this period has closed. Current stats regarding the number of arguments on each side will be visible.

Period 2 – Review/Open Comments. In this period, community members can view all arguments posted in first period (no additional arguments can be posted). Users can offer up rebuttals for each argument and/or poke holes in the argument.

Period 3 - Voting. The goal is to reward the user with the best, most sound argument. To combat "vote bombing", voters will provide 2 votes (1 on each side based on the best argument and not necessarily their specific stance). A community member from each side will receive an award for having the soundest argument – the best debater.

Question 3: Minimum Character Counts for Argument?
USER: Ore_Ele says, "... As we know, it is difficult to get people to read debates that only have 8 arguments (4 for each side). If this is "too popular" than it risks having dozens of arguments for each side. How do we get people to read them all to vote accurately? And what would determine which arguments are presented first (I'd bet that most people will only read the first few and only vote amoung those, rather than reading all)."

We definitely want to create some barrier of entry to encourage thoughtful responses. Our thought is to also create a structure/organization to the argument to differentiate quick debates from the forum. Below is simply a suggestion of how a structured response system might look, but we certainly want your feedback if better structures/formats exist. What structure is ideal?

Stating Position – Defending or Refuting Core Issue (50 minimum characters)
Support # 1 (100 minimum characters)
Support # 2 (100 minimum characters)
Support # 3 (100 minimum characters)
Concluding Statement (200 minimum characters)

Question 4: Award Two Winners?
It is our belief that choosing two winners will help award the best argument as opposed to belief. Our goal is to eliminate or reduce "vote bombing" (i.e. Community members choosing the worst argument for their opposing belief or repeatedly voting for their own argument)

Some questions to consider: Can you vote for only the side on which you participated, only on the opposing side or on both sides? How many votes do you receive? Can you vote if you did not participate in the debate?

Question 5: What if the responses posted first get the most reads and, therefore, the most votes?
During the voting period, debate posts will be randomly served so that the first person to respond isn't necessarily the first post shown. Posts will be randomized and dynamically served to community members reading and voting on the debates.
While this may not be a Phase 1 initiative, we will monitor the Quick quick debates for participation numbers, number of times posts are read, etc. to see if this type of feature is necessary.

Question 6: Should we cap the amount of participants?
As I mentioned above, in Phase 1, it is important to remember that we do not want to create complex problems for issues that don't exist. We want to understand adoption rates, retention and other metrics prior to capping these debates. If we see that participation is extremely high, we will address capping the number of participants. Our fear is that capping the amount of participants will cause many people to miss the quick debate of the day.

The goal of the quick debates are to not only mold, train and teach new debaters, but also provide an avenue wherein all users can participate in thoughtful, intelligent conversations with like-minded (and not-so-like-minded) individuals . This also enables more than 2 community members to participate in the debate.

A few other random thoughts/ideas we have considered include:
--Random Assignment - Randomly assigning participants to a specific side of the debate. This is how schools/clubs handle debates, and it will help newbies learn the art of focusing on facts and reason rather than passion.

--Coaching Opportunities – Give expert DDOers an opportunity to coach new debaters by providing constructive feedback in Period 2 of the debates. We believe this will help with retention by helping new users gain confidence.

--Name for Quick Debates – Do you have any suggestions for an alternate name for quick debates?

Again, we believe wholeheartedly in this community and know it needs improvement. We value your feedback, words of encouragement, ideas and criticisms.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:10:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
As long as the current debate style exists still I am ok with it.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
MasterKage
Posts: 1,257
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:23:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't like the idea of random stances, since a new person may have only studied one side of the debate, and some people may be poor at defending what they disagree with.

Overall, though, awesome releases. ;)

[Kage's Stamp of Approval]
This signature is full of timey wimey wibbly wobbly stuff...
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:29:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I particularly like the idea of "Random Assignment" to a certain side of a debate.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:34:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm really looking forward to it. I like the idea of arguments on one side of the debate being put up next to each other for inspection instead of just opposing arguments.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:41:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I have a concern regarding the 2 votes. Whether we choose to believe it or not, there are some people that are partisan and not entirely objective. It is entirly resonable to expect some people to vote for the best argument on their side, and intentionally vote for the worst argument on the opposing side (in an attempt to discredit and belittle). I believe this is not an unreasonable concern, since this is seen in modern politics and political primaries.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 3:59:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 3:29:42 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
I particularly like the idea of "Random Assignment" to a certain side of a debate.

As long as its an optional setting like character limits!
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Nur-Ab-Sal
Posts: 1,637
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 4:22:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 3:59:52 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 6/29/2012 3:29:42 PM, Nur-Ab-Sal wrote:
I particularly like the idea of "Random Assignment" to a certain side of a debate.

As long as its an optional setting like character limits!

Of course. Most functions should be optional.
Genesis I. And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2012 5:56:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/29/2012 3:17:28 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Can't wait to see it.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
LaissezFaire
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:47:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

It's 100 characters minimum, not maximum.
Should we subsidize education?
http://www.debate.org...

http://mises.org...

http://lewrockwell.com...

http://antiwar.com...

: At 6/22/2011 6:57:23 PM, el-badgero wrote:
: i didn't like [Obama]. he was the only black dude in moneygall yet he claimed to be home. obvious liar is obvious liar. i bet him and bin laden are bumfvcking right now.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:48:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!

Oryus, it is quite s
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:49:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:48:36 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!

Oryus, it is quite s

Damn! I couldn't do it!
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:50:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:48:36 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!

Oryus, it is quite s

XD

Ok, Laissezfaire wins a prize for being smart and figuring out the mystery us smart folks couldn't handle lol
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
johnnyboy54
Posts: 6,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:51:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:50:20 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:48:36 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!

Oryus, it is quite s

XD

Ok, Laissezfaire wins a prize for being smart and figuring out the mystery us smart folks couldn't handle lol

I don't know what you are referencing. What does unregulated capitalism have to do with this?
I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 1:52:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 1:51:40 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:50:20 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:48:36 AM, johnnyboy54 wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:45:33 AM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/30/2012 1:35:18 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
100 characters!? It's for people not literate enough for twitter.

Low character counts are not for arguments. It is just for stating unsupported opinions, not a debate.

lolwut? Ok, somehow I missed the magnitude of that part when I first read it.... That is a bit detrimental..... That doesn't seem right...

Someone convince me otherwise! 20 characters or less!!!

Oryus, it is quite s

XD

Ok, Laissezfaire wins a prize for being smart and figuring out the mystery us smart folks couldn't handle lol

I don't know what you are referencing. What does unregulated capitalism have to do with this?

hehe Everything. And nothing.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 2:51:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is intriguing. I like the idea of having a daily discussion issue. You could call them "Daily Debates" instead of quick debates, which seems to have a negative connotation.

I don't really understand the format. Each debater gets 5 posts? Intro, support 1-3, and conclusion? Or is that all in one post?

I also don't see how you addressed Ore_Ele's objection, which is also my biggest objection: people don't like to read long debates. Anything longer than 2 rounds of 8000 characters is *really* hard to get people to read on this site, unless there's a forfeit. Imposing a *minimum* character count seems like the opposite of addressing this concern. The issue is that if each person posts 3000 characters and 20 people post, then that's 60,000 characters, which is the same as an 8,000 character debate with four rounds. There's no way you can get people to vote on such a long debate. At least, not while reading everyone's arguments. You're going to get zero judges who read everything if too many people write arguments. Especially if there's one of these to read each day.

So I'm mostly concerned about low judge turnout and judges not reading everything, which is already a huge problem now. And vote bombing, as Ore_Ele is also worried about.

I'm willing to try anything on a provisional basis, so I guess we'll see how it goes, but I'm skeptical. You either get low turnout of debaters, with only a few people participating, or you get low judge turnout. There's a direct inverse relationship between the number of people who debate and the number of people who will be willing to judge.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:00:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
More of my controversy-stirring to follow...

A better name than "quick debate" would be "practice debate". This helps make it clear that the aim of the "debate" is to help gain experience in and learn about a particular case. I think the format has the potential for a lot more feedback and engagement for new debaters, but it should really be seen as a practice for "normal" debates rather than a quick version. I don't think this is necessarily intimidating, so long as we remember to use it as an opportunity for mentoring as Suzanne said, and give newbies a chance.

Thanks for listening to the community BTW Juggle people! Much appreciated.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:37:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 3:00:11 AM, larztheloser wrote:
More of my controversy-stirring to follow...

A better name than "quick debate" would be "practice debate". This helps make it clear that the aim of the "debate" is to help gain experience in and learn about a particular case. I think the format has the potential for a lot more feedback and engagement for new debaters, but it should really be seen as a practice for "normal" debates rather than a quick version. I don't think this is necessarily intimidating, so long as we remember to use it as an opportunity for mentoring as Suzanne said, and give newbies a chance.

Thanks for listening to the community BTW Juggle people! Much appreciated.

The 200 character minimum (and any limits always means that's the target in practice) is something that is irritatingly going in the wrong direction, I think. If it were 200 minimum and one can edit other people's posts and make them better, then it'd be less...evil, but I didn't see that.

Also, that character limit is something I missed.
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...