Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

When one side deserves all 7?

GaryBacon
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 3:43:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The etiquette on this site makes things difficult sometimes. What happens if you read a debate, and after reading the arguments conclude that one side had better arguments, sources, conduct, and spelling? Based on the unspoken rules, you basically have to go against the truth and give some points to the opponent too. Otherwise your vote will simply be looked at as a "Vote Bomb" and others will vote for the opposition without even reading the arguments. This sometimes creates a win for the person that clearly lost the debate. A so-called "Vote Bomb" is often "countered" more than once, which swings the votes to the other side.

So what do I do when I read a debate, and one side dominates in all aspects? For the time being, I've simply voted 3 points for more convincing arguments and left everything else tied. Is this how it should be?
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Posts: 2,900
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 3:56:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/17/2013 3:43:37 PM, GaryBacon wrote:
The etiquette on this site makes things difficult sometimes. What happens if you read a debate, and after reading the arguments conclude that one side had better arguments, sources, conduct, and spelling? Based on the unspoken rules, you basically have to go against the truth and give some points to the opponent too. Otherwise your vote will simply be looked at as a "Vote Bomb" and others will vote for the opposition without even reading the arguments. This sometimes creates a win for the person that clearly lost the debate. A so-called "Vote Bomb" is often "countered" more than once, which swings the votes to the other side.

So what do I do when I read a debate, and one side dominates in all aspects? For the time being, I've simply voted 3 points for more convincing arguments and left everything else tied. Is this how it should be?

If you justify every point, it shouldn't be considered a votebomb. There's a slight problem of people occasionally countering a non-votebomb just because they disagree with the justification for the allocation, which shouldn't be done as long as some justification exists.
'When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.' - John 16:13
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 3:27:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou is right. Your RFD is the key thing that votebomb watchers look at. As long as your RFD shows that you read the debate and you can provide a valid reason why you gave points in each area no one will have a problem with it.
TolerantSpirit
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.
Think before you talk.
Raisor
Posts: 4,459
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 3:14:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

Plagiarism warrants conduct for the act of plagiarism, sources for not citing the original source, and arguments because plagiarized content shouldn't be considered in evaluating the round so the debater has effectively not posted anything for the judge to consider.
TolerantSpirit
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 3:21:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 3:14:49 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

Plagiarism warrants conduct for the act of plagiarism, sources for not citing the original source, and arguments because plagiarized content shouldn't be considered in evaluating the round so the debater has effectively not posted anything for the judge to consider.

Sources is which is most reliable, not who failed to give one (especially not if neither side gives one) Arguments can still be convincing from plagiarised content (vote is which is more convincing).
Think before you talk.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 5:27:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

I've run across debates in which the whole argument was stolen, and fraudulently represented as the debater's work. In other words, the debater never actually showed up for the debate, but simply substituted someone else's words.

That's a full forfeit, seven points for failing to even argue.

And in lesser cases, I still give seven points. Plagiarism is cheating, and is far too frequent. It needs serious discouraging.
TolerantSpirit
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 5:45:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 5:27:11 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

I've run across debates in which the whole argument was stolen, and fraudulently represented as the debater's work. In other words, the debater never actually showed up for the debate, but simply substituted someone else's words.

That's a full forfeit, seven points for failing to even argue.

And in lesser cases, I still give seven points. Plagiarism is cheating, and is far too frequent. It needs serious discouraging.

Right...

So if you debate absolute crap against a decent plagiarizer, you should win. Totally...
Think before you talk.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 6:25:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

Let's run through them:

S&G - didn't spell a single word themselves, nor grammar. Points against them for not writing a single sentence.
Conduct - obvious.
Convincing arguments - Didn't present their own arguments. Equivalent of forfeit.
Sources - Actively not sourcing a case.

Moreover, bad etiquette puts more points against them. Plagiarism irl in a debate is basically a ban and repeated derision, not simply points against the individual.
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...
TolerantSpirit
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 6:27:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 6:25:16 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

Let's run through them:

S&G - didn't spell a single word themselves, nor grammar. Points against them for not writing a single sentence.
Conduct - obvious.
Convincing arguments - Didn't present their own arguments. Equivalent of forfeit.
Sources - Actively not sourcing a case.

Moreover, bad etiquette puts more points against them. Plagiarism irl in a debate is basically a ban and repeated derision, not simply points against the individual.

Plagiarism is a silly little thing.

Someone can genuinely word things the same way as another.
Think before you talk.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 7:42:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 6:27:32 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
Plagiarism is a silly little thing.

Someone can genuinely word things the same way as another.

That's like saying murder is a silly little thing because sometimes you were somewhere else when it happened. Not plagiarizing doesn't make plagiarizing silly.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/18/2013 8:34:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 2/18/2013 3:21:40 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 3:14:49 PM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/18/2013 2:59:33 PM, TolerantSpirit wrote:
At 2/18/2013 1:12:42 PM, wiploc wrote:
I also give a full seven points for plagiarism.

So plagiarising a piece with correct spelling and grammar and from a credible source and with more convincing argumentation renders those 6 points?...

Only conduct is a worthy penalty for plagiarism.

Plagiarism warrants conduct for the act of plagiarism, sources for not citing the original source, and arguments because plagiarized content shouldn't be considered in evaluating the round so the debater has effectively not posted anything for the judge to consider.

Sources is which is most reliable, not who failed to give one (especially not if neither side gives one) Arguments can still be convincing from plagiarised content (vote is which is more convincing).

When answering the question of "who made the more convincing argument" your choices are between Pro and Con, not Pro and Con's source.