Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Source Votes

Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 8:25:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If one person uses arguments that don't require sources, should they still get docked for sources if the other person had sources? Or, should one only get docked for source points if they have material that requires sources, but don't include them?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 8:28:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
it depends on the topic. A topic that heavily relies on deduction would need no sources. A topic that relies on research will need sources. But if you sourceload like 16k used to do, then I'd advocate losing conduct for that.
"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
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 9:11:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 8:28:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
it depends on the topic. A topic that heavily relies on deduction would need no sources. A topic that relies on research will need sources. But if you sourceload like 16k used to do, then I'd advocate losing conduct for that.

http://www.debate.org...

One person used sources, and the other one did not. But one person used arguments that dealt with research, and the other one did not. Since Pro used sources, I gave him the source vote. Con pointed out that his argument did not require sources, so I am wondering if my vote is justified.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 9:44:14 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 9:11:13 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 7/23/2013 8:28:39 PM, 000ike wrote:
it depends on the topic. A topic that heavily relies on deduction would need no sources. A topic that relies on research will need sources. But if you sourceload like 16k used to do, then I'd advocate losing conduct for that.

http://www.debate.org...

One person used sources, and the other one did not. But one person used arguments that dealt with research, and the other one did not. Since Pro used sources, I gave him the source vote. Con pointed out that his argument did not require sources, so I am wondering if my vote is justified.

In my opinion, both votes on that debate are unjustified. The resolution is clearly dealing with issues in the deductive domain, any sources would, at best, be stating that "person X said Y and I agree with him" which is appeal to authority and can be disregarded. If he's using the source only to substantiate a tid-bit of factual information, then the burden was on him to provide the source and he was merely filling his burden, whereas his opponent had none. All things equal, there should not be any vote rewarding sources to one debater unless someone does not fill his burden to provide some.
"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
Subutai
Posts: 3,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 9:53:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
For the topic of the Kalam Cosmological Argument, I think it is very reasonable to have sources. These arguments aren't so much deduction now that quantum mechanics has made tremendous strides in explaining what could have really happened during the period "before the Big Bang", so to speak. It's reasonable to cite scientific papers that lean one way or the other, especially when it comes to defeating the first premise.

However, one can very well argue the KCA strictly through logic alone. It's a tough call, and I think you, as the voter, can lean either way. Neither would be a vote bomb.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 10:04:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I've seen Airmax refer to sources (in addition to conduct and spelling) as something not voted on for a slight tie-breaking, but only for a firm victory.

Personally I don't buy the "but my argument didn't need sources" line, an argument also doesn't need to be spellchecked, we still award points to the other side.

I admit were I voting on that debate, I'd skip sources due to not being able to verify the sources used (or at least being too lazy to).
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 10:09:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 10:04:12 PM, Ragnar wrote:

Personally I don't buy the "but my argument didn't need sources" line, an argument also doesn't need to be spellchecked, we still award points to the other side.

That doesn't make any sense. The voting tally explicitly demands you to write in a manner that is comprehensible and lucid to the reader (that means checking spelling and grammar). The voting tally does not demand you to go research things even if nothing you said required it. The claim of a fact or use of induction requires external substantiation. By asserting something, you initiate pressure on yourself to prove it. This is where source points come from. You can't just decide that one side had a few links so that automatically means they deserve more of a vote tally, especially if the topic is largely abstract and deductive.

That's abusive voting.
"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
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 10:27:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 10:09:30 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/23/2013 10:04:12 PM, Ragnar wrote:

Personally I don't buy the "but my argument didn't need sources" line, an argument also doesn't need to be spellchecked, we still award points to the other side.

That doesn't make any sense. The voting tally explicitly demands you to write in a manner that is comprehensible and lucid to the reader (that means checking spelling and grammar). The voting tally does not demand you to go research things even if nothing you said required it. The claim of a fact or use of induction requires external substantiation. By asserting something, you initiate pressure on yourself to prove it. This is where source points come from. You can't just decide that one side had a few links so that automatically means they deserve more of a vote tally, especially if the topic is largely abstract and deductive.

That's abusive voting.

Grow up. As I went on to say about the debate in question, "I'd skip sources due to not being able to verify the sources used."
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2013 10:55:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 10:27:22 PM, Ragnar wrote:
At 7/23/2013 10:09:30 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/23/2013 10:04:12 PM, Ragnar wrote:

Personally I don't buy the "but my argument didn't need sources" line, an argument also doesn't need to be spellchecked, we still award points to the other side.

That doesn't make any sense. The voting tally explicitly demands you to write in a manner that is comprehensible and lucid to the reader (that means checking spelling and grammar). The voting tally does not demand you to go research things even if nothing you said required it. The claim of a fact or use of induction requires external substantiation. By asserting something, you initiate pressure on yourself to prove it. This is where source points come from. You can't just decide that one side had a few links so that automatically means they deserve more of a vote tally, especially if the topic is largely abstract and deductive.

That's abusive voting.

Grow up. As I went on to say about the debate in question, "I'd skip sources due to not being able to verify the sources used."

I understand that, but I'm referring to the principle behind your sentiment that you "don't buy the claim that the argument didn't need sources". Sources aren't there just for the sake of being there. They're there for factual substantiation. If the debate is a research oriented debate and the debater argues with no facts and no source, he'll lose arguments but you can't take off sources. If the debate is a logic-oriented debate and the debater argues with no facts and no sources, you'd have to judge the cogency of his reasoning, and can't take off for sources.
"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
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2013 12:21:02 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/23/2013 10:55:25 PM, 000ike wrote:
If the debate is a research oriented debate and the debater argues with no facts and no source, he'll lose arguments but you can't take off sources. If the debate is a logic-oriented debate and the debater argues with no facts and no sources, you'd have to judge the cogency of his reasoning, and can't take off for sources.

Thanks for the good joke, that really made me laugh.

As if anyone would actually believe that one side failing to list their sources, would actually give them complete immunity from the other side gaining a source vote, through use of good sources that support their claim.
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/24/2013 12:49:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There were 3 sources to no sources (I think?), and the side without sources made an argument against the argument, not the facts.

I don't think it's a bomb, but I do disagree with you that sources should be awarded.

Volume is not the sole indicator.

Were the sources convincing and supportive? I would say that, in this case, they were not. Sure, they stated things that the debater wanted said, but (for example) the WLC quote just basically made an assertion of its own. I don't think it really "supported" the argument being made, it just repeated it (now with more PhD!). They were just arguments the debater didn't have to present, rather than support for an argument. The points could have just as easily been made by the debater without the sourcing.

Would I win sources in a largely deductive debate if at one point I quoted Clint Eastwood "You see in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig." and sourced it, while my opponent just made deductive arguments?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!