Total Posts:59|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Remember when people posted on the forums?

TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2013 6:08:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/22/2013 7:32:20 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
Pepperridge Farm remembers.

Lol yeah its been dead.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Magic8000
Posts: 975
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2013 11:02:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Polls are the new hip wiz bang thing the ddo kids are into. I'm too old to keep up with these trends.
404 coherent debate topic not found. Please restart the debate with clear resolution.

"So Magic8000 believes Einstein was a proctologist who was persuaded by the Government and Hitler to fabricate the Theory of Relativity"- GWL-CPA
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2013 12:11:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
School started, so high schoolers are temporarily worried about pleasing teachers and college students are busy finding new sources of drugs and beer. DDO activity will pick up when those distractions are settled.
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 10:55:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.

I'm glad that you haven't died of laughter yet.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:01:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 10:55:41 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.

I'm glad that you haven't died of laughter yet.

Same to you.

That happened a long time ago, anyway. Being dead has a way of clarifying one's priorities. Best thing that ever happened to me.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:19:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:01:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:55:41 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.

I'm glad that you haven't died of laughter yet.

Same to you.

That happened a long time ago, anyway. Being dead has a way of clarifying one's priorities. Best thing that ever happened to me.

Whoa, haven't seen you in awhile... nice to see you back.. how's it goin?
Debate.org Moderator
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:24:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/23/2013 12:11:41 PM, RoyLatham wrote:
School started, so high schoolers are temporarily worried about pleasing teachers and college students are busy finding new sources of drugs and beer. DDO activity will pick up when those distractions are settled.

lol
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:34:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:19:42 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:01:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:55:41 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.

I'm glad that you haven't died of laughter yet.

Same to you.

That happened a long time ago, anyway. Being dead has a way of clarifying one's priorities. Best thing that ever happened to me.

Whoa, haven't seen you in awhile... nice to see you back.. how's it goin?

Thanks! Yeah, life's good. Had a saturday evening free, thought I'd drop by and vote on a few debates. They are just as awful as they were when I left.

Everything else around here seems to have changed massively, though. I'm really impressed by the culture of tolerance and understanding that has sprung up here in the forums, and how thorough and fair the voting has become. The new site design must be responsible for this in some way.

How are you?
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2013 11:41:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:34:39 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:19:42 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:01:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:55:41 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 9/28/2013 10:38:18 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
It's a myth. No-one has ever posted here.

People will believe anything these days.

I'm glad that you haven't died of laughter yet.

Same to you.

That happened a long time ago, anyway. Being dead has a way of clarifying one's priorities. Best thing that ever happened to me.

Whoa, haven't seen you in awhile... nice to see you back.. how's it goin?

Thanks! Yeah, life's good. Had a saturday evening free, thought I'd drop by and vote on a few debates. They are just as awful as they were when I left.

Yeah... there are certainly a decent number of bad and spam debates. The "opinions" and "polls" section though have reduced them a bit though as members now have other and better outlets to use instead of creating debates that aren't necessary. But we still have a fair amount of pretty bad ones. Feel free to report the spam ones so we can take a look and remove them so the better debates don't get flooded out of being recognized.

Everything else around here seems to have changed massively, though. I'm really impressed by the culture of tolerance and understanding that has sprung up here in the forums, and how thorough and fair the voting has become. The new site design must be responsible for this in some way.

I appreciate that analysis of it. I think several things have played a role in this development and several site updates have been key, especially with regards to voting resulting in changing the culture of voting on the site.

How are you?

I've been doing well, thanks. Pretty busy with work and personal stuff, and the site is always a work in progress that keeps me busier as well.
Debate.org Moderator
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 2:45:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/28/2013 11:41:45 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:34:39 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
Everything else around here seems to have changed massively, though. I'm really impressed by the culture of tolerance and understanding that has sprung up here in the forums, and how thorough and fair the voting has become. The new site design must be responsible for this in some way.

I appreciate that analysis of it. I think several things have played a role in this development and several site updates have been key, especially with regards to voting resulting in changing the culture of voting on the site.

I really can't let this slide.

When Airmax was elected, I contested that an average of FOUR completely unvoted debates at one time, with an average of 1.5 votes among recent debates, was crazy high. I've crunched a ton of numbers and come to a very strong conclusion that the number of debates that finish unvoted must have a strong influence on the site's member retention rate for new members. Now - even with site updates and more voting initiatives than ever - there have consistently been more than TWENTY completely unvoted debates for several weeks. It used to be the case that unvoted debates would become voted upon being publicized in, say, the forum (especially after Juggle removed recently completed debates from the home page), but this is no longer the case.

And the culture of the votes we do have? I'll let them speak for themselves. The top four votes featured on the homepage have the following RFDs for their arguments (at present):
"Con provided far better reasoning for his position."
"This debate was silly."
"While I do feel that Google, for the most part, is a trustworthy company, Con gave the best reasoning and sources to believe otherwise. Pro's argument seemed to largely be "We should trust Google because it's great!" which doesn't fly in a debate."
"Pro didn't even present arguments, and he had no proof that the sites were googled."
Nothing constructive, and more than half of it not even relevant to the arguments that were presented in the debate. I can't be alone in thinking that any culture that promotes votes like these is bad. None of these votes could be described as thorough, and in my view, none justified that they were fair.

THAT BEING SAID there are some truly fantastic votes on DDO. I've been following TUF's competition carefully and anyone else who has done so will agree with me here. But to claim that site updates have improved voting is nothing short of outrageous and untrue.

Oh - and in case anyone was wondering what I've been up to these past few weeks and why my account has gone all quiet - let's just say that I had a brainwave and I'm working on something very cool.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 3:43:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 2:45:54 AM, larztheloser wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:41:45 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/28/2013 11:34:39 PM, Chrysippus wrote:
Everything else around here seems to have changed massively, though. I'm really impressed by the culture of tolerance and understanding that has sprung up here in the forums, and how thorough and fair the voting has become. The new site design must be responsible for this in some way.

I appreciate that analysis of it. I think several things have played a role in this development and several site updates have been key, especially with regards to voting resulting in changing the culture of voting on the site.

I really can't let this slide.

When Airmax was elected, I contested that an average of FOUR completely unvoted debates at one time, with an average of 1.5 votes among recent debates, was crazy high. I've crunched a ton of numbers and come to a very strong conclusion that the number of debates that finish unvoted must have a strong influence on the site's member retention rate for new members. Now - even with site updates and more voting initiatives than ever - there have consistently been more than TWENTY completely unvoted debates for several weeks. It used to be the case that unvoted debates would become voted upon being publicized in, say, the forum (especially after Juggle removed recently completed debates from the home page), but this is no longer the case.

And the culture of the votes we do have? I'll let them speak for themselves. The top four votes featured on the homepage have the following RFDs for their arguments (at present):
"Con provided far better reasoning for his position."
"This debate was silly."
"While I do feel that Google, for the most part, is a trustworthy company, Con gave the best reasoning and sources to believe otherwise. Pro's argument seemed to largely be "We should trust Google because it's great!" which doesn't fly in a debate."
"Pro didn't even present arguments, and he had no proof that the sites were googled."
Nothing constructive, and more than half of it not even relevant to the arguments that were presented in the debate. I can't be alone in thinking that any culture that promotes votes like these is bad. None of these votes could be described as thorough, and in my view, none justified that they were fair.

THAT BEING SAID there are some truly fantastic votes on DDO. I've been following TUF's competition carefully and anyone else who has done so will agree with me here. But to claim that site updates have improved voting is nothing short of outrageous and untrue.

Oh - and in case anyone was wondering what I've been up to these past few weeks and why my account has gone all quiet - let's just say that I had a brainwave and I'm working on something very cool.

There is certainly much that needs to improved. What I'm referring to when I say the "culture of voting" is specifically with regards to terrible RFDs and counter voting and counter-counter voting etc. If you see a bad RFD, you can report the vote now, and it will be evaluated and if appropriate will be removed.
Debate.org Moderator
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 8:22:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'd like to point out that, four years ago when I joined, very few people ever left an analysis of their vote. Votes were secret, no-one could tell who had voted, and there was no accountability. Certain members were totally untouchable, as they were guaranteed a landslide victory in any debate through their friends and secondary accounts - voting blocs were a game breaking problem. Most people voted all seven for themselves, regardless of how well they did. It was very discouraging, because those of us who were not power players had little chance of success.

Now?
-Votes are visible.
-One cannot vote for oneself.
-There are no major voting blocs, and the community is very harsh on those who would attempt to set one up.
-Bad votes are reportable.
-RFD's are mandatory. Even if the vast majority of them are only "Because Pro is dumb," it at least gives you a good idea which votes are the result of careful thought, and which have the moral weight of a brain fart.
-Multiple accounts have been majorly cracked down upon, and Joshander is gone(?) - possibly.

It's night and day.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 8:22:27 AM, Chrysippus wrote:
I'd like to point out that, four years ago when I joined, very few people ever left an analysis of their vote. Votes were secret, no-one could tell who had voted, and there was no accountability. Certain members were totally untouchable, as they were guaranteed a landslide victory in any debate through their friends and secondary accounts - voting blocs were a game breaking problem. Most people voted all seven for themselves, regardless of how well they did. It was very discouraging, because those of us who were not power players had little chance of success.

Now?
-Votes are visible.
-One cannot vote for oneself.
-There are no major voting blocs, and the community is very harsh on those who would attempt to set one up.
-Bad votes are reportable.
-RFD's are mandatory. Even if the vast majority of them are only "Because Pro is dumb," it at least gives you a good idea which votes are the result of careful thought, and which have the moral weight of a brain fart.
-Multiple accounts have been majorly cracked down upon, and Joshander is gone(?) - possibly.

It's night and day.

Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

All of those so-called advantages presuppose that voting happens. When I joined the site there was no such thing as an RFD, but I used to average well over 10 votes on each of my debates. I'm sure some of them were terrible - and I've long said that simply me knowing which ones are terrible is not enough, the site should actually encourage people to vote well (among other things) - but in aggregate it balanced out. The community also generally engaged with debates more. I could already tell which debates were good by who left comments or discussed the debate with me in messages. The 7-point disadvantage was a huge problem for me because I couldn't vote as this was before the president could manually confirm people. But most site users could, and that's the point. I rarely had a debate where, given my situation, my opponent still voted for themselves. And strictly speaking the present system doesn't stop one voting for oneself, just makes it slightly harder. Voting blocs still definitely exist, in fact I'd say I get more "vote and I'll return the favor" messages than ever before. Bad votes are "reportable" but little action is usually taken - try reporting some of those up there and see for yourself.

One thing that does seem to be true is that multiple accounts seem slightly less prevalent. I don't really see that as a symptom of any site change, but simply of the site growing up and trolls with no real interest in debating but only a few cheap wins slowly migrating forumwise.
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 8:54:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM, larztheloser wrote:
At 9/29/2013 8:22:27 AM, Chrysippus wrote:
I'd like to point out that, four years ago when I joined, very few people ever left an analysis of their vote. Votes were secret, no-one could tell who had voted, and there was no accountability. Certain members were totally untouchable, as they were guaranteed a landslide victory in any debate through their friends and secondary accounts - voting blocs were a game breaking problem. Most people voted all seven for themselves, regardless of how well they did. It was very discouraging, because those of us who were not power players had little chance of success.

Now?
-Votes are visible.
-One cannot vote for oneself.
-There are no major voting blocs, and the community is very harsh on those who would attempt to set one up.
-Bad votes are reportable.
-RFD's are mandatory. Even if the vast majority of them are only "Because Pro is dumb," it at least gives you a good idea which votes are the result of careful thought, and which have the moral weight of a brain fart.
-Multiple accounts have been majorly cracked down upon, and Joshander is gone(?) - possibly.

It's night and day.

Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

All of those so-called advantages presuppose that voting happens. When I joined the site there was no such thing as an RFD, but I used to average well over 10 votes on each of my debates. I'm sure some of them were terrible - and I've long said that simply me knowing which ones are terrible is not enough, the site should actually encourage people to vote well (among other things) - but in aggregate it balanced out. The community also generally engaged with debates more. I could already tell which debates were good by who left comments or discussed the debate with me in messages. The 7-point disadvantage was a huge problem for me because I couldn't vote as this was before the president could manually confirm people. But most site users could, and that's the point. I rarely had a debate where, given my situation, my opponent still voted for themselves. And strictly speaking the present system doesn't stop one voting for oneself, just makes it slightly harder. Voting blocs still definitely exist, in fact I'd say I get more "vote and I'll return the favor" messages than ever before. Bad votes are "reportable" but little action is usually taken - try reporting some of those up there and see for yourself.

One thing that does seem to be true is that multiple accounts seem slightly less prevalent. I don't really see that as a symptom of any site change, but simply of the site growing up and trolls with no real interest in debating but only a few cheap wins slowly migrating forumwise.

Well, I have been absent for a year, and my observation is limited by that. I'm not going to argue with you, since you've been using the system and I have not. Things appeared to have majorly improved in my absence - perhaps only superficially.

And it's good to see you too, larz.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
brant.merrell
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 11:28:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I used to get into forums on other websites . . . they always seemed to start repeating themselves after five pages or so. Most people never took the time to read and realize their points had already been made, they hurried up and posted their 'original' thought. Scienceforums.net is an exemplary exception - to the point of being boring haha. Maybe DBO has a smaller or more thoughtful community too. We'll see . . .
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2013 12:28:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM, larztheloser wrote:
Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

...The community also generally engaged with debates more. I could already tell which debates were good by who left comments or discussed the debate with me in messages.

I think you make good points. There is a flood of poor quality debates, and that discourages voting. Debates in which neither side does anything other than state an opinion are hard to judge, and "Nobody said anything." is not a helpful RFD.

I think the site has done many positive things to help increase voting, but it's really tough getting all the noobs up to speed.

One idea is to make a handy checklist voting guide. It would include items to consider in evaluating each side in a debate like:

Did the spelling, grammar, or formatting make it difficult to understand the debater?
Did the debater cite sources showing his claims were true?
Where the debaters sources factual and reliable?
If sources were opinions, were the opinions from experts on the subject?

You get the idea. I started to build such a guide, but I put it aside in the face of an acute attack of laziness. Ideally, the guide could be a popup activated by voter, with points and fractions of a point awarded based upon each debaters checkmarks, then the points reduced to who one each category. Note that subject sports like figure skating have similar guides; a fizzled sit-spin is always a deduction of 0.2115 points or whatever.

My thinking is that this would train voters, but also give debaters more detailed feedback. Even if the debater make a good argument, it's helpful to know that it didn't make it through to voters. A problem is that debaters will then attack every detail of the vote, which works to scare off voters. Imagine if voters in major public elections had to leave RFDs, which were then published. Not good.
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 11:13:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM, larztheloser wrote:
At 9/29/2013 8:22:27 AM, Chrysippus wrote:
I'd like to point out that, four years ago when I joined, very few people ever left an analysis of their vote. Votes were secret, no-one could tell who had voted, and there was no accountability. Certain members were totally untouchable, as they were guaranteed a landslide victory in any debate through their friends and secondary accounts - voting blocs were a game breaking problem. Most people voted all seven for themselves, regardless of how well they did. It was very discouraging, because those of us who were not power players had little chance of success.

Now?
-Votes are visible.
-One cannot vote for oneself.
-There are no major voting blocs, and the community is very harsh on those who would attempt to set one up.
-Bad votes are reportable.
-RFD's are mandatory. Even if the vast majority of them are only "Because Pro is dumb," it at least gives you a good idea which votes are the result of careful thought, and which have the moral weight of a brain fart.
-Multiple accounts have been majorly cracked down upon, and Joshander is gone(?) - possibly.

It's night and day.

Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

What more do you want, a damn essay? People are just casting votes theyre not on trial.

All of those so-called advantages presuppose that voting happens. When I joined the site there was no such thing as an RFD, but I used to average well over 10 votes on each of my debates. I'm sure some of them were terrible

'some' is a hell of an understatement.....

and I've long said that simply me knowing which ones are terrible is not enough, the site should actually encourage people to vote well (among other things) - but in aggregate it balanced out. The community also generally engaged with debates more. I could already tell which debates were good by who left comments or discussed the debate with me in messages. The 7-point disadvantage was a huge problem for me because I couldn't vote as this was before the president could manually confirm people. But most site users could, and that's the point. I rarely had a debate where, given my situation, my opponent still voted for themselves. And strictly speaking the present system doesn't stop one voting for oneself, just makes it slightly harder.

I call horse sh*t. Sh*tty votes can be removed even after the debate has left the voting period which means no biased vote is permanent. Its just about impossible now to vote for your own side.

Voting blocs still definitely exist, in fact I'd say I get more "vote and I'll return the favor" messages than ever before. Bad votes are "reportable" but little action is usually taken

lol, oh you poor soul you simply have no idea what youre talking about here. Little action IS taken on reviewing reported votes, hell there's an entire committee of about a dozen different people who all give their take on reported votes, and those that are condemned always get deleted.

One thing that does seem to be true is that multiple accounts seem slightly less prevalent.

Slightly is another understatement, you seem to be prone to making those. Multiaccounting has dropped tremendously over the course of the last few years or so, i remember how I couldnt go vote on a debate anywhere without finding debates where both accounts were identical in everything and debated each other exclusively.

I don't really see that as a symptom of any site change, but simply of the site growing up and trolls with no real interest in debating but only a few cheap wins slowly migrating forumwise.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

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
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 12:08:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 11:13:53 PM, imabench wrote:
At 9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM, larztheloser wrote:
Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

What more do you want, a damn essay? People are just casting votes theyre not on trial.

Insofar as an essay means an attempt at writing, I want more than an essay. I want a reasoned analysis for why the debate fell as it did and how debaters can improve. This might be distinguished from a trial where a judge considers what the issue in the trial is, what the law/evidence is, and how that might be applied. Totally different job.

I think that many votes actually are good, the site culture just doesn't encourage anyone to articulate them well.

All of those so-called advantages presuppose that voting happens. When I joined the site there was no such thing as an RFD, but I used to average well over 10 votes on each of my debates. I'm sure some of them were terrible

'some' is a hell of an understatement.....

I'd like to see your evidence here.

and I've long said that simply me knowing which ones are terrible is not enough, the site should actually encourage people to vote well (among other things) - but in aggregate it balanced out. The community also generally engaged with debates more. I could already tell which debates were good by who left comments or discussed the debate with me in messages. The 7-point disadvantage was a huge problem for me because I couldn't vote as this was before the president could manually confirm people. But most site users could, and that's the point. I rarely had a debate where, given my situation, my opponent still voted for themselves. And strictly speaking the present system doesn't stop one voting for oneself, just makes it slightly harder.

I call horse sh*t. Sh*tty votes can be removed even after the debate has left the voting period which means no biased vote is permanent. Its just about impossible now to vote for your own side.

In that case by your logic you'd remove most votes that happened before RFDs were introduced.

Point is though - votebombs USUALLY get removed, but I have NEVER seen a vote removed simply because it was biased. And let's be fair - bias is almost impossible to measure when there isn't a proper RFD. But apparently not leaving a full RFD isn't grounds either, and indeed given your first comment seems to be something you support. Your sentiments are exactly what is wrong with this site culturally.

Voting blocs still definitely exist, in fact I'd say I get more "vote and I'll return the favor" messages than ever before. Bad votes are "reportable" but little action is usually taken

lol, oh you poor soul you simply have no idea what youre talking about here. Little action IS taken on reviewing reported votes, hell there's an entire committee of about a dozen different people who all give their take on reported votes, and those that are condemned always get deleted.

Yes, I know this committee very well. And I also know that their decisions aren't exactly very strongly in favor of promoting a more positive culture. But the point is that when the feature was first introduced, I reported two votes that were clear votebombs. Both still exist. I gave examples in this very thread of bad votes. All of them still exist.

One thing that does seem to be true is that multiple accounts seem slightly less prevalent.

Slightly is another understatement, you seem to be prone to making those. Multiaccounting has dropped tremendously over the course of the last few years or so, i remember how I couldnt go vote on a debate anywhere without finding debates where both accounts were identical in everything and debated each other exclusively.

You obviously never voted on any of my debates.

Point is there are at least three debates in the voting period right now I would strongly suspect of exactly this. Personally I do feel that it's less, but it was never tremendously more. At least 75% or so of all the vote-period debates have always been genuine so far as I can tell.

Now please grow up and stop attacking anyone who criticises the site administration with no evidence to back up those claims. Stating your opinion is fine, attacking me ad hom for stating mine is a strong symptom of being a jerk as opposed to a good debater.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 12:27:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
@Larz

I think you make some fair points, and I disagree on others.

Regardless of that, every vote that is reported is dealt with in some way, either it is deleted immediately because it's an obvious votebomb, or it is submitted for review and evaluated fairly. My concern here is that I have never seen you report a vote as you have said, nor do I recall seeing you report anything, ever. So I'm worried that it may be possible that there may be a bug with the reporting system. If you would be willing, could you report a bunch of votes and put "test" in the explanation so I can evaluate what could be a potential problem and fix it.

Thank you.
Debate.org Moderator
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 1:19:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Fair point that it could have been a bug, I understand new features inevitably will have teething problems, and I haven't reported since then because I didn't get any kind of response. Just tested with another vote, will be interested to see what happens.
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 1:37:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 12:08:41 AM, larztheloser wrote:
At 9/30/2013 11:13:53 PM, imabench wrote:
At 9/29/2013 8:45:17 AM, larztheloser wrote:
Still today, very few people leave an analysis of their vote. They just leave a sorry excuse for an RFD because they have to.

What more do you want, a damn essay? People are just casting votes theyre not on trial.

Insofar as an essay means an attempt at writing, I want more than an essay. I want a reasoned analysis for why the debate fell as it did and how debaters can improve. This might be distinguished from a trial where a judge considers what the issue in the trial is, what the law/evidence is, and how that might be applied. Totally different job.

Ah I see now. Youre bat sh*t insane.

I think that many votes actually are good, the site culture just doesn't encourage anyone to articulate them well.

See previous statement.

All of those so-called advantages presuppose that voting happens. When I joined the site there was no such thing as an RFD, but I used to average well over 10 votes on each of my debates. I'm sure some of them were terrible

'some' is a hell of an understatement.....

I'd like to see your evidence here.

In the past you didnt even have to give an rfd to vote, opponents could vote for themselves, voting blocs could be found all over the site and could in no ways be countered, people could vote all 7 points to one side purely out of spite, the list goes on and on.

. And strictly speaking the present system doesn't stop one voting for oneself, just makes it slightly harder.

I call horse sh*t. Sh*tty votes can be removed even after the debate has left the voting period which means no biased vote is permanent. Its just about impossible now to vote for your own side.

In that case by your logic you'd remove most votes that happened before RFDs were introduced.

Probably yeah, since most votes without rfd's were horse sh*t. Voting on this site used to be atrocious, right now we're arguably in a golden age

Point is though - votebombs USUALLY get removed, but I have NEVER seen a vote removed simply because it was biased.

I know you think youre God and that you can see everything on here, but the pathetic fact is that you arent. I had two biased votes removed from a debate of mine literally 4 days ago, and since biased votes are often votebombs, they quickly get removed.

And let's be fair - bias is almost impossible to measure when there isn't a proper RFD.

LOL, you have to be blind to not be able to spot bias in biased votes....

But apparently not leaving a full RFD isn't grounds either, and indeed given your first comment seems to be something you support. Your sentiments are exactly what is wrong with this site culturally.

No you just are delusional in how this site works.

Voting blocs still definitely exist, in fact I'd say I get more "vote and I'll return the favor" messages than ever before. Bad votes are "reportable" but little action is usually taken

lol, oh you poor soul you simply have no idea what youre talking about here. Little action IS taken on reviewing reported votes, hell there's an entire committee of about a dozen different people who all give their take on reported votes, and those that are condemned always get deleted.

Yes, I know this committee very well. And I also know that their decisions aren't exactly very strongly in favor of promoting a more positive culture. But the point is that when the feature was first introduced, I reported two votes that were clear votebombs. Both still exist. I gave examples in this very thread of bad votes. All of them still exist.

You want people to give essays when they vote and tell debators where they can improve, chances are you have no idea what the hell an actual votebomb even is which is why your reports were ignored.

Post the two votes you reported on here and we'll see if they are actually votebombs or if youre just out of your mind (again).

One thing that does seem to be true is that multiple accounts seem slightly less prevalent.

Slightly is another understatement, you seem to be prone to making those. Multiaccounting has dropped tremendously over the course of the last few years or so, i remember how I couldnt go vote on a debate anywhere without finding debates where both accounts were identical in everything and debated each other exclusively.

You obviously never voted on any of my debates.

Of course I dont, your debates are boring as sh**.

Point is there are at least three debates in the voting period right now I would strongly suspect of exactly this. Personally I do feel that it's less, but it was never tremendously more. At least 75% or so of all the vote-period debates have always been genuine so far as I can tell.

Now please grow up and stop attacking anyone who criticises the site administration with no evidence to back up those claims.

Says the guy who is basing all of his arguments off of his own deluded opinions..... Are you a hypocrite or just too stupid to see that youre out of your mind?

Stating your opinion is fine, attacking me ad hom for stating mine is a strong symptom of being a jerk as opposed to a good debater.

I'm not in here to be a good debater idiot, im here to tell you that you're being an idiot.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

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
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 1:48:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 1:19:01 AM, larztheloser wrote:
Fair point that it could have been a bug, I understand new features inevitably will have teething problems, and I haven't reported since then because I didn't get any kind of response. Just tested with another vote, will be interested to see what happens.

Thank you, I received the report and have submitted it for review. While the vote you reported is what I'd call an obviously terrible vote, I rarely like to make this call unilaterally. It's also practical, so that I don't have to read hundreds of votes a month and evaluate them personally (though "unexplained points" coupled with a lack of RFD will tend to get deleted very quickly). It usually takes 24-48 hours (though most are resolved within a day) for the vote to be removed so enough opinions can be given.

When the "vote reporting" update happened there were a number of bugs associated with it, as happens with these types of things. I recall that the most notable was that when a vote was deleted, the points weren't actually removed from a debate, making it effectively useless. Juggle fixed this quickly, though it wouldn't surprise me if in that first week or so some votes being reported were being dropped. I don't believe that is the case anymore, and I believe all the issues have been fixed and the system, while a constant work in progress to make it as efficient and fair as possible, is generally sound.

Again I appreciate your help, thanks.
Debate.org Moderator
larztheloser
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 3:01:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 1:37:51 AM, imabench wrote:
Ah I see now. Youre bat sh*t insane.

If you think wanting a fair and through analysis of your debates makes you insane, then clearly what you want is unfair and superficial analysis. There's a good reason why the site is SUPPOSED to remedy that, even if my experience teaches me it doesn't.

In the past you didnt even have to give an rfd to vote, opponents could vote for themselves, voting blocs could be found all over the site and could in no ways be countered, people could vote all 7 points to one side purely out of spite, the list goes on and on.

Oh, you mean all those things I dealt with above? This is a circular argument where the premise is the conclusion I have already refuted.

Probably yeah, since most votes without rfd's were horse sh*t. Voting on this site used to be atrocious, right now we're arguably in a golden age

I would definitely argue that.

I had two biased votes removed from a debate of mine literally 4 days ago, and since biased votes are often votebombs, they quickly get removed.

A biased vote to me is one that considers in its RFD the arguments of only one side. It might consider those in a ton of depth with great analysis, but without engaging with the other side's material it is one-sided, thus biased. Votebombs by definition give fair consideration to neither side, thus they cannot be biased. So you're clearly using a very strange definition of a biased vote.

LOL, you have to be blind to not be able to spot bias in biased votes....

Only if it's very explicit. So for example an RFD may say: "Pro's first argument was the most compelling, thus pro wins the debate". That's implicitly biased, but it could be that the voter just didn't give a full account of his reasoning.

You want people to give essays when they vote and tell debators where they can improve, chances are you have no idea what the hell an actual votebomb even is which is why your reports were ignored.

The site defines votebombs as basing the vote on no material from inside the debate. RL debating goes further and also excludes using any arguments not given in the debate. It's a long time ago now so I'm not sure where to find them, the site doesn't keep track of reported votes, but if I happen to run across them I'll send them to you. They were pretty clear.

Of course I dont, your debates are boring as sh**.

Eye of the beholder. Perhaps the only stuff you're interested in is people who break site rules? I've also reported both of your previous posts for breaking the site TOS in several ways, I'll also be interested to see whether this amazing system you support works for that.

Says the guy who is basing all of his arguments off of his own deluded opinions..... Are you a hypocrite or just too stupid to see that youre out of your mind?

Difference between stating your opinion (OK), attacking my opinion with your arguments (also OK), and attacking me personally (not OK). It's very important in life. Learn it.

I'm not in here to be a good debater idiot, im here to tell you that you're being an idiot.

In other words, you go to debate.org with no interest in debating, only to attack other members of the community.
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 9:07:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 3:01:59 AM, larztheloser wrote:
At 10/2/2013 1:37:51 AM, imabench wrote:
Ah I see now. Youre bat sh*t insane.

If you think wanting a fair and through analysis of your debates makes you insane, then clearly what you want is unfair and superficial analysis.

There's a difference between wanting a fair analysis and wanting a damn essay, which is what you are asking for

In the past you didnt even have to give an rfd to vote, opponents could vote for themselves, voting blocs could be found all over the site and could in no ways be countered, people could vote all 7 points to one side purely out of spite, the list goes on and on.

Oh, you mean all those things I dealt with above? This is a circular argument where the premise is the conclusion I have already refuted.

So you concede that voting has gotten enormously better, for it

Probably yeah, since most votes without rfd's were horse sh*t. Voting on this site used to be atrocious, right now we're arguably in a golden age

I would definitely argue that.

Do you have the memory span of a gold fish or do you honestly not remember all the stuff I JUST posted about how bad voting was in the past?

I had two biased votes removed from a debate of mine literally 4 days ago, and since biased votes are often votebombs, they quickly get removed.

. Votebombs by definition give fair consideration to neither side, thus they cannot be biased.

Vote bombs give points to one does because they only considered one sides arguments....

LOL, you have to be blind to not be able to spot bias in biased votes....

Only if it's very explicit.

Not really, most people smarter then the average toaster can spot bias in just about any vote that gives unjustified points to one side....

You want people to give essays when they vote and tell debators where they can improve, chances are you have no idea what the hell an actual votebomb even is which is why your reports were ignored.

The site defines votebombs as basing the vote on no material from inside the debate.

Except that vote bombs go beyond that...

RL debating goes further and also excludes using any arguments not given in the debate. It's a long time ago now so I'm not sure where to find them, the site doesn't keep track of reported votes, but if I happen to run across them I'll send them to you. They were pretty clear.

So you can't find them.

Lol

Of course I dont, your debates are boring as sh**.

Eye of the beholder. Perhaps the only stuff you're interested in is people who break site rules?

No idiot, I'm interested in debates that aren't boring as sh*t. Pretty pathetic jump from that right to an Ad-Hom on your part though, only shows how insane you are

I've also reported both of your previous posts for breaking the site TOS in several ways, I'll also be interested to see whether this amazing system you support works for that.

Reporting posts for being called an idiot when you're acting like an idiot isn't grounds for having them removed, idiot.

Says the guy who is basing all of his arguments off of his own deluded opinions..... Are you a hypocrite or just too stupid to see that youre out of your mind?

Difference between stating your opinion (OK), attacking my opinion with your arguments (also OK), and attacking me personally (not OK). It's very important in life.

Lol it's not that important. And when someone (you) does act like an idiot then people have the freedom to point out when those people (you) are being idiots....

I'm not in here to be a good debater idiot, im here to tell you that you're being an idiot.

In other words, you go to debate.org with no interest in debating, only to attack other members of the community.

No dumba**, I'm here IN THIS THREAD to tell you that you're being an idiot..... Jesus Christ do you have the reading comprehension of a three your old or just an have an elaborate victimization complex?
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

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