Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Chuz Life's Top Ten Ways to Improve DDO

Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

2. Please allow the ability to create 'polls' for new threads in the forums. This is a great feature on other online forums and I believe it would be an interesting feature to have here.

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

This would result in a measure of 8 being factored into the ELO formula as an indicator of the players conduct. And so on for the other parameters.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

7. Please enable a search option for past forum threads. We can search opinions, debates and even people on the main page. Why not the forums?

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

9. How about trending graphs showing the ever changing of popular opinions on the top searched for and debated issues. The "opinions" tab gives percentages "pro and con" with issues all over the place and new questions posed pushing out the old. (a lot of redundancy) But we have nothing to show the overall trends.

10. A wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

Anyway, these are just some of my ideas and I didn't want to flood the suggestion box, so I thought I would offer them this way instead.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 1:13:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

2. Please allow the ability to create 'polls' for new threads in the forums. This is a great feature on other online forums and I believe it would be an interesting feature to have here.

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that ONLY those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

This would result in a measure of 8 being factored into the ELO formula as an indicator of the players conduct. And so on for the other parameters.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate. We should be able to just click on a word or comment IN the debate (that has been hyperlinked) and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to have to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

7. Please enable a search option for past forum threads. We can search opinions, debates and even people on the main page. Why not the forums?

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

9. How about trending graphs showing the ever changing of popular opinions on the top searched for and debated issues. The "opinions" tab gives percentages "pro and con" with issues all over the place and new questions posed pushing out the old. (a lot of redundancy) But we have nothing to show the overall trends.

10. Please enable a wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

Anyway, these are just some of my ideas and I didn't want to flood the suggestion box, so I thought I would offer them this way instead.

Edits in bolded text. Sorry I didn't proof it better before posting.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 6:54:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

By then it would be far too late though. Trust me, the general public does a much faster job of counter votebombinb a votebomber then reporting it to the admins.

2. Please allow the ability to create 'polls' for new threads in the forums. This is a great feature on other online forums and I believe it would be an interesting feature to have here.

We already have polls for members to use at will, and if you have an idea for a new type of thread such as 'sports' or 'politics' then pitch it to others and see if the idea takes hold. Some members feel that we already have too many forum topics and that we need to start reducing how many of them there are, not expand them. Plus I cant even think of any new types of forum topics.

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

FF one round or FF every round? Theres a massive difference we're talking about here.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

This is the stupidest idea yet. If this were implemented then Danielle and RoyLatham would never be allowed to debate again, and other debates between top members would mean that only those with the highest ELO's could vote. The problem with this is that Roy and Danielle arent frequent voters.

Also why the hell should only people with Elo's as the lowest debater can be allowed to vote? Ones ELO ranking doesnt reflect how much they know about the world and to assume so is very discriminatory against them.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Just seems like a really nitpicky way to make sure debates dont end in ties to me...

This would result in a measure of 8 being factored into the ELO formula as an indicator of the players conduct. And so on for the other parameters.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

Not everybody does that though. I leave links right below the argument I am making, not sandwich it all the way at the bottom of the round.... Ive seen others do the exact same thing too.

Plus I dont think that being too lazy to scroll down warrants this kind of an update either.

7. Please enable a search option for past forum threads. We can search opinions, debates and even people on the main page. Why not the forums?

You can though. Ask FREEDO how to do it though i keep forgetting how it works, it involves google.

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

I like this idea, but what 'features' would we be talking about exactly?

9. How about trending graphs showing the ever changing of popular opinions on the top searched for and debated issues. The "opinions" tab gives percentages "pro and con" with issues all over the place and new questions posed pushing out the old. (a lot of redundancy) But we have nothing to show the overall trends.

You can look at the 'Big Issues' and see the percentage change over time as long as you remember what it used to be. An idea worth pondering though.

10. A wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

Youd need to elaborate on how these other formats would work and why we absolutely need them before I even begin to push for such a change.

Anyway, these are just some of my ideas and I didn't want to flood the suggestion box, so I thought I would offer them this way instead.

I like 2 out of 10 of them.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
emj32
Posts: 111
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 9:11:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Chuz Life's Top Ten Ways to Improve DDO

1. Abortion
2. Abortion
3. Abortion
4. Abortion
5. Abortion
6. Abortion
7. Abortion
8. Abortion
9. Abortion
10. Abortion
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 11:13:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
If #1 ever happened, I'd either stop debating or leave the site.

2. I agree.

3. Disagree. When I'm having a good debate and someone forfeits once, I generally ask the voters to still vote. Actually, it used to be that 1 forfeit never resulted in anything more than the conduct point.

4. As an option maybe, but not always.

5. Ugh, don't you think vote-bombing is bad enough already?

6. Sure

7. You can do that already.

8. Depends what the features are. Also some people can't get their account activated sometimes. It took me almost a year for mine,

9. N/O

10. N/O
"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)
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 12:32:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:54:01 AM, imabench wrote:
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

By then it would be far too late though. Trust me, the general public does a much faster job of counter votebombinb a votebomber then reporting it to the admins.

What? Mods and admins don't have the means to remove votes that are obviously vote bombs?

2. Please allow the ability to create 'polls' for new threads in the forums. This is a great feature on other online forums and I believe it would be an interesting feature to have here.

We already have polls for members to use at will, and if you have an idea for a new type of thread such as 'sports' or 'politics' then pitch it to others and see if the idea takes hold. Some members feel that we already have too many forum topics and that we need to start reducing how many of them there are, not expand them. Plus I cant even think of any new types of forum topics.

We can't link the poll to our own threads, imabench. Not like this, we can't.: http://www.debatepolitics.com...

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

FF one round or FF every round? Theres a massive difference we're talking about here.

I should have been more precise. FF one round? No. Three or four? Yes. You can't have a true debate with one player ending it with an acceptance round.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

This is the stupidest idea yet. If this were implemented then Danielle and RoyLatham would never be allowed to debate again, and other debates between top members would mean that only those with the highest ELO's could vote. The problem with this is that Roy and Danielle arent frequent voters.

Excellent point. The idea was to keep people from creating new accounts and using them to go after those with higher ELOs as a means to bring them down. Vote bombing, etc.

Also why the hell should only people with Elo's as the lowest debater can be allowed to vote? Ones ELO ranking doesnt reflect how much they know about the world and to assume so is very discriminatory against them.

See above.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Just seems like a really nitpicky way to make sure debates dont end in ties to me...

As I explained in another thread, the ELO system was developed to rank CHESS players. Chess games have rules and limits on how each piece can be moved, etc. It's a much more controlled environment than we have in a debate. So there are countless variables that the system can't measure or 'rank.' That is, unless we somehow develop a means to measure those parameters and insert them into the formula.

This would result in a measure of 8 being factored into the ELO formula as an indicator of the players conduct. And so on for the other parameters.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

Not everybody does that though. I leave links right below the argument I am making, not sandwich it all the way at the bottom of the round.... Ive seen others do the exact same thing too.

Plus I dont think that being too lazy to scroll down warrants this kind of an update either.

7. Please enable a search option for past forum threads. We can search opinions, debates and even people on the main page. Why not the forums?

You can though. Ask FREEDO how to do it though i keep forgetting how it works, it involves google.

Is it too much to add it too the searches list on the front page?

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

I like this idea, but what 'features' would we be talking about exactly?

The ability to create new debates, for example.

9. How about trending graphs showing the ever changing of popular opinions on the top searched for and debated issues. The "opinions" tab gives percentages "pro and con" with issues all over the place and new questions posed pushing out the old. (a lot of redundancy) But we have nothing to show the overall trends.

You can look at the 'Big Issues' and see the percentage change over time as long as you remember what it used to be. An idea worth pondering though.

10. A wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

Youd need to elaborate on how these other formats would work and why we absolutely need them before I even begin to push for such a change.

Need? It has to be a need?

Anyway, these are just some of my ideas and I didn't want to flood the suggestion box, so I thought I would offer them this way instead.

I like 2 out of 10 of them.

No biggie. I was sleepless and bored.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 2:28:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 9:11:57 AM, emj32 wrote:
Chuz Life's Top Ten Ways to Improve DDO

1. Abortion
2. Abortion
3. Abortion
4. Abortion
5. Abortion
6. Abortion
7. Abortion
8. Abortion
9. Abortion
10. Abortion

You seem to have a personal problem or issue with me that no-one else seems to share.

Do you want to talk about it?
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 4:06:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:32:24 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 1/7/2013 6:54:01 AM, imabench wrote:
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

By then it would be far too late though. Trust me, the general public does a much faster job of counter votebombinb a votebomber then reporting it to the admins.

What? Mods and admins don't have the means to remove votes that are obviously vote bombs?

Not to me knowledge.

2. Please allow the ability to create 'polls' for new threads in the forums. This is a great feature on other online forums and I believe it would be an interesting feature to have here.

We already have polls for members to use at will, and if you have an idea for a new type of thread such as 'sports' or 'politics' then pitch it to others and see if the idea takes hold. Some members feel that we already have too many forum topics and that we need to start reducing how many of them there are, not expand them. Plus I cant even think of any new types of forum topics.

We can't link the poll to our own threads, imabench. Not like this, we can't.: http://www.debatepolitics.com...

Oh THATS what youre talking about.

Seems cool until someone makes one meant to annoy someone else. I think weve had polls asking for who the dumbest person on the site is at one point....

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

FF one round or FF every round? Theres a massive difference we're talking about here.

I should have been more precise. FF one round? No. Three or four? Yes. You can't have a true debate with one player ending it with an acceptance round.

Idunno, Ive seen people forfeit debates 4 times yet the otherside forgets to even make arguments, or ones where one side makes good arguments 1 round and then forfeit the next 3 or 4.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

This is the stupidest idea yet. If this were implemented then Danielle and RoyLatham would never be allowed to debate again, and other debates between top members would mean that only those with the highest ELO's could vote. The problem with this is that Roy and Danielle arent frequent voters.

Excellent point. The idea was to keep people from creating new accounts and using them to go after those with higher ELOs as a means to bring them down. Vote bombing, etc.

Thats called Multiaccounting, its easy to find and shut down before any damage is done, and its a bannable offence.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Just seems like a really nitpicky way to make sure debates dont end in ties to me...

As I explained in another thread, the ELO system was developed to rank CHESS players. Chess games have rules and limits on how each piece can be moved, etc. It's a much more controlled environment than we have in a debate. So there are countless variables that the system can't measure or 'rank.' That is, unless we somehow develop a means to measure those parameters and insert them into the formula.

No system is perfect, and Elo does a pretty damn good job. Plus you dont have to fix something that isnt broken.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

7. Please enable a search option for past forum threads. We can search opinions, debates and even people on the main page. Why not the forums?

You can though. Ask FREEDO how to do it though i keep forgetting how it works, it involves google.

Is it too much to add it too the searches list on the front page?

Depends on your level of laziness.

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

I like this idea, but what 'features' would we be talking about exactly?

The ability to create new debates, for example.

Oh thats f*cked up. There are people who never vote who I still would like to have around to hear their opinion over certain matters. Plus if people had to give one vote for one debate it would drive people off the site, or would cause votes to get really really sh*tty.

10. A wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

Youd need to elaborate on how these other formats would work and why we absolutely need them before I even begin to push for such a change.

Need? It has to be a need?

Yeah, Change isnt good just because its change. If you give something to people they never use then people will just ask for it to be trashed. Example: The arts and funny forum
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 5:21:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
@ Imabench

That was my last on it. Yours can be the last word. They were only suggestions and some food for thought. Nothing more.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 6:26:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Some interesting ideas. I think an alternative format with Q&A has potential.

I often comment on debate that have not been accepted to point out what I think are errors in the wording of the resolution or other procedural problems. Besides that, a debate site is about debate, and having comments is in the spirit of debate. I agree that it's not good to have cheerleading or coaching in the comments, but suppressing comments altogether would make matters worse overall.

I think the best way to improve judging would be a programmed-learning course on how to judge a debate. Maybe members who complete the course could get a gold star by their name or something. But I wouldn't restrict voting. Voting is an important part of participating in the site.

Often when someone forfeits, the opponent just says "arguments continued." The conduct point is lost, but there is still an opportunity to win arguments. The forfeit usually means the guy has given up, but upon occasion I've voted arguments in favor of the guy with the forfeit.

I put links in line, right after the point the link supports: [1. link]. They still have to be numbered for reference. I started doing that after a reader suggested it would be more convenient. I think it is. I favor not including the characters in links in the character counts.
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2013 7:22:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
SEARCH OPTION IN FORUMS

HYPERLINKS IN DEBATES

Two issues that would greatly improve the quality of DDO. They are mostly site functionality issues.

The rest of the stuff is fluff. Maintaining a community that self regulates solves most of those issues- this is what we do now and though there are injustices and it can be frustrating, it generally works well IMO.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the points where the votes don't mean anything.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 12:34:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did not do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the point where neither the votes nor the wins mean anything.

Edits.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
DoctorDeku
Posts: 162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 3:29:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 6:26:30 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
I favor not including the characters in links in the character counts.

Yes.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 7:35:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the points where the votes don't mean anything.

I understand and spend a lot of time trying to combat many of these negative aspects of the site, many of us have had a debate effected by a vote bomber and it is certainly discouraging. I believe it has improved but there is always more work to be done.

As for "multi votes", this is one of the sites cardinal offenses and I've spent a lot of time making sure it doesn't happen. Can you please contact me privately when you believe a multi has voted. Based on my research and efforts I believe it is incredibly rare, and when it does happen is almost always resolved. But if you believe that it is happening this often I'd appreciate it if you could reference these instances so I can look into it.

Also please contact me for any other of these things that are harming your DDO experience, including vote bombs, and unfair counter votes so that I can resolve those issues as well.

Thank you.
Debate.org Moderator
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 7:51:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 7:35:41 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the points where the votes don't mean anything.

I understand and spend a lot of time trying to combat many of these negative aspects of the site, many of us have had a debate effected by a vote bomber and it is certainly discouraging. I believe it has improved but there is always more work to be done.

As for "multi votes", this is one of the sites cardinal offenses and I've spent a lot of time making sure it doesn't happen. Can you please contact me privately when you believe a multi has voted. Based on my research and efforts I believe it is incredibly rare, and when it does happen is almost always resolved. But if you believe that it is happening this often I'd appreciate it if you could reference these instances so I can look into it.

Also please contact me for any other of these things that are harming your DDO experience, including vote bombs, and unfair counter votes so that I can resolve those issues as well.

Thank you.

Thank you for the response but I won't be bothering you with every suspicion I have of someone running multiples. For me every new or rarely used account is suspicious. Especially when the voter has shown no interest or comments about the debate before it was accepted or during the time it was taking place.

There are logging methods to show who visited what page and how long they were on it. (this would help to know if someone could have actually taken the time to read the debate) but why go down that road for this? Some people are determined to spoil things for everyone else or to at least stack the decks in their own favors.

I give up on trying to understand why they do it.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
airmax1227
Posts: 13,241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 8:00:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 7:51:42 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 1/8/2013 7:35:41 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the points where the votes don't mean anything.

I understand and spend a lot of time trying to combat many of these negative aspects of the site, many of us have had a debate effected by a vote bomber and it is certainly discouraging. I believe it has improved but there is always more work to be done.

As for "multi votes", this is one of the sites cardinal offenses and I've spent a lot of time making sure it doesn't happen. Can you please contact me privately when you believe a multi has voted. Based on my research and efforts I believe it is incredibly rare, and when it does happen is almost always resolved. But if you believe that it is happening this often I'd appreciate it if you could reference these instances so I can look into it.

Also please contact me for any other of these things that are harming your DDO experience, including vote bombs, and unfair counter votes so that I can resolve those issues as well.

Thank you.

Thank you for the response but I won't be bothering you with every suspicion I have of someone running multiples. For me every new or rarely used account is suspicious. Especially when the voter has shown no interest or comments about the debate before it was accepted or during the time it was taking place.

There are logging methods to show who visited what page and how long they were on it. (this would help to know if someone could have actually taken the time to read the debate) but why go down that road for this? Some people are determined to spoil things for everyone else or to at least stack the decks in their own favors.

I give up on trying to understand why they do it.

I feel responsible to make sure that each of these things is dealt with and at least known about, so I would appreciate knowing about each of your suspicions and it's certainly no bother to me.

Like I said, I believe multi voting is incredibly rare, and if it assuages your feelings that something unfair is going on I'm more than happy to look into it for you. Similarly to the other things you mentioned, I'm more than happy to do what I can to resolve those issues when they happen.

I've also given up on caring why some members want to be antisocial, destructive or ever harm someones experience on the site, but nonetheless, I always feel responsible to resolve it, so always feel free to contact me if you feel you have been wronged in any way.
Debate.org Moderator
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 8:06:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 8:00:35 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 1/8/2013 7:51:42 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 1/8/2013 7:35:41 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 1/8/2013 10:59:21 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
Speaking only for myself. If something isn't done soon about the voting and vote bombing, counter voting and people using 2nd accounts to skew the outcomes... I'm afraid this is not the place for me.

I've tried to be a good and fair contributor and I do think this site has a lot of potential. However, there are few things more discouraging than being accused of something you did do or to have all your hard work in a debate wiped out by an obvious fake account troll.

I don't want to leave because I wanted to be able to have informative debates here and then to be able to link to them and to reference them elsewhere on the Web.

But this is getting out of control and to the points where the votes don't mean anything.

I understand and spend a lot of time trying to combat many of these negative aspects of the site, many of us have had a debate effected by a vote bomber and it is certainly discouraging. I believe it has improved but there is always more work to be done.

As for "multi votes", this is one of the sites cardinal offenses and I've spent a lot of time making sure it doesn't happen. Can you please contact me privately when you believe a multi has voted. Based on my research and efforts I believe it is incredibly rare, and when it does happen is almost always resolved. But if you believe that it is happening this often I'd appreciate it if you could reference these instances so I can look into it.

Also please contact me for any other of these things that are harming your DDO experience, including vote bombs, and unfair counter votes so that I can resolve those issues as well.

Thank you.

Thank you for the response but I won't be bothering you with every suspicion I have of someone running multiples. For me every new or rarely used account is suspicious. Especially when the voter has shown no interest or comments about the debate before it was accepted or during the time it was taking place.

There are logging methods to show who visited what page and how long they were on it. (this would help to know if someone could have actually taken the time to read the debate) but why go down that road for this? Some people are determined to spoil things for everyone else or to at least stack the decks in their own favors.

I give up on trying to understand why they do it.

I feel responsible to make sure that each of these things is dealt with and at least known about, so I would appreciate knowing about each of your suspicions and it's certainly no bother to me.

Like I said, I believe multi voting is incredibly rare, and if it assuages your feelings that something unfair is going on I'm more than happy to look into it for you. Similarly to the other things you mentioned, I'm more than happy to do what I can to resolve those issues when they happen.

I've also given up on caring why some members want to be antisocial, destructive or ever harm someones experience on the site, but nonetheless, I always feel responsible to resolve it, so always feel free to contact me if you feel you have been wronged in any way.

Thank you.

I will try to keep that in mind.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
SarcasticIndeed
Posts: 2,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2013 8:12:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Also, before the option to search forums is added (if it ever happens), you can easily search forums by going to google and typing:

site:debate.org/forums <desired subject>

I hope we will be able to search forums, however, it's not very hard to code, I believe, and will be far easier than going to google to search.
<SIGNATURE CENSORED> nac
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2013 1:25:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/8/2013 8:12:45 PM, SarcasticIndeed wrote:
Also, before the option to search forums is added (if it ever happens), you can easily search forums by going to google and typing:

site:debate.org/forums <desired subject>

I hope we will be able to search forums, however, it's not very hard to code, I believe, and will be far easier than going to google to search.

Someone pointed out previously that seems to search only the titles of threads and not the bodies of the posts in the threads. I tried quoting an unusual character string and it wasn't found.

I think php doesn't build the page for the search engine to spider. I think there is a way to fix that, but it's beyond my knowledge.
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2013 5:12:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hey, Chuz Life!

Thanks for the great ideas, and thank you to everyone else for their input.

We will add these to our list of potential enhancements and keep an eye on this forum to monitor other members' feedback.

Thank you all for continuously being so involved in the DDO community!
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2013 5:17:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/9/2013 5:12:30 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
Hey, Chuz Life!

Thanks for the great ideas, and thank you to everyone else for their input.

We will add these to our list of potential enhancements and keep an eye on this forum to monitor other members' feedback.

Thank you all for continuously being so involved in the DDO community!

You're welcome. Thanks for your considerations.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
jh1234l
Posts: 580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2013 7:31:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
In no certain order.

1. As already mentioned in the suggestion box, make the comments (RFD's) private/ non public until the voting is closed on a debate. The voters can each see their own comments. The admins and moderators can see them as well. But individual members would only see the vote tally until the polls close. If Vote Bombing is suspected, it can be reported and the admins could look into it.

I think this would be harder for the debators. The debators want to know about what they should improve on. If we do this, debators who made debates with 3 month voting periods will probably NEVER know what they should improve on, because they cannot read the RFD's


2. Polls

I agree.

3. Automate wins for Forfeited Debates. Everyone who votes on them (generally) just puts "FF" or something along those lines in the RFDs anyway.

However, if someone forfeits, this makes them lose, but if they post something like : "I forfeit this round" in the arguments, they won't automatically lose.

4. Improve the ELO formula / rankings by making it so that those with an ELO as high as or higher than the lowest ELO of the two involved in the debate can vote on that debate.

That can be left as an option when the instigator instigates the debate, but if it is forced it will cause trouble: NO ONE gets to vote if RoyLatham And Danielle are debating each other.

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Maybe something like:
CON-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 3 4 5 PRO

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

This allows debators to shorten their sources, allowing them to cheat and get extra character space. If this is enabled, we will soon see a boom of 5000 character debates (instead of 8000) to 'cope' with it.

7. Search for the forums

I agree

8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

This means that those who did not do the confirm identity will be locked out from almost everything.

9. Trending graphs

I agree with this.


10. A wider variety of debate formats. For example, I would like to debate someone in the form of an interview, rather than a round after round debate. The "total characters" for the entire 'debate' could be set to say 30,000 (evenly divided) and it would proceed like an TV interview or conversation until the characters run out.

This means that one debator can add something like "..............." to the end of his/her arguments, reducing the other debator's space, preventing them from making a full case and allowing for an easy unfair win.
My political compass:
Economic Left/Right: -1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.82
1 square right of Nelson Mandela, 2 squares down from Francois Hollande
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2013 8:47:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/7/2013 12:54:14 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:

5. Enable an ability to rate the 'voting parameters' on a scale of 1-10 instead of just selecting "Con, Tied or Pro" and tie those votes into the ELO formula as a quasi statement or measurement representative of the challenge level of the debate.

Example: "Who had better conduct?" Con Tied Pro
Scale: Slightly better 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Agree with this, except I think the conduct point is redunkulous. What is it that one remembers, when they remember almost nothing else, from a presidential debate?

The zingers.

If anything, there should be a diss scale instead of a Miss Congeniality Award. It would emulate reality much more closely.

This would result in a measure of 8 being factored into the ELO formula as an indicator of the players conduct. And so on for the other parameters.

6. Enable to ability the use of hyperlinks in the debates and forums. I think this would improve efficiency when reading a debate to just click on a word IN the debate that has been hyperlinked and to have that open a new tab with that linked source... rather than to scroll to the bottom of the debate and find the corresponding link there.

Enable standard BB Code. It's more of an all inclusive solution.


8. REQUIRE voting for members to be able to access certain features. We have a lot of members with numerous debates under their belt who never vote on anyone Else's. If you don't vote, you don't play.

A karma/popularity system, restricted to one up or down vote, per member, per day would accomplish the same thing. I'd actually like to see a dark side/light side duo of rooms that were then only accessible by those with negative and positive scores, respectively.


9. How about...

agree with the rest 100%
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...