Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Voting etiquette

daniel_t
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2009 6:20:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I think I know the answer to this, but how does everybody feel about voting based on information not presented in the argument?

I'm assuming that this is bad form, but then again if I can come with an easy refutation of someone's argument, then it wasn't very convincing even if his opponent did a poor job of refuting it...
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2009 8:22:35 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
As long as you distinguish between "information" and "arguments," I think you should be well within your voting rights. For example, if a debater bases on argument on a completely false premise or set of data, then that argument is flawed.

Now, what you shouldn't do is make arguments FOR a debater. Competitively, it's called voting "off the flow," which means that because you inherently preferred a given side or debater and basically filled in the missing pieces of the debate for them.
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2009 8:29:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
If you let any of your personal views influence your voting then it is biased voting, and you should refrain from voting or unvote and attempt to re-look at the debate in an unbiased manner
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2009 8:29:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/14/2009 6:20:45 AM, daniel_t wrote:
I think I know the answer to this, but how does everybody feel about voting based on information not presented in the argument?

I'm assuming that this is bad form, but then again if I can come with an easy refutation of someone's argument, then it wasn't very convincing even if his opponent did a poor job of refuting it...

If the counter argument you have is simple and obvious, such that you think the person's argument sucks, his conternder ought to have noticed and said so.

Why should the contender win arguments when he didn't offer any good arguments.

Plus the person might have been able to combat your argument, or offer an alternative, but he never got that chance b/c his contender was too stupid to offer a good argument.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."