Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

An automated way to reduce forfeitures

wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:08:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
- The number of each debater's forfeited rounds should be recorded automatically.

- When we're setting up a debate, we should be able to exclude people based on how many forfeits they have.

- The number of debates you need before you can vote should automatically go up (not down) by one for each round you forfeit before achieving voter status.

- A forfeit prohibits you from scoring. That is, debates should be broken into four categories, not three: Wins, Losses, Ties, Forfeits. If you forfeit a round, your debate may be recorded as a forfeit or a loss, but never as a tie or a win.

- Any debate in which both parties forfeit a round is automatically terminated and moved to the Junk Pile. Debates would be divided into these categories: Challenge Period, Debating Period, Voting Period, Post-voting Period, and Junk Pile.

This could be entirely automatic, requiring no effort after the original programming by Juggle. It should dramatically reduce the number of forfeits.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:17:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't see this reducing forfeits. Forfeits are caused by people not being interested long enough to finish a debate and none of these help to maintain interest. All they do is alienate people that may have had forfeit issues in the past when others will not accept debates from them, thus lowering their interest in the site further.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:18:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
- When we're setting up a debate, we should be able to exclude people based on how
many forfeits they have.

Too harsh?

- The requirement can be waived. If somebody posts in the comments and promises not to forfeit, most people would waive the requirement. And then, having put his word on the line, the perp probably won't forfeit. Mission accomplished. But some people won't waive the requirement, and that's their choice. Mission accomplished that way too.

- The requirement could, as an alternative, be stated as a percentage. If you have many forfeits, but they happen in less than 2% of your debates, I wouldn't hesitate to let you accept a challenge.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:18:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/26/2013 3:17:10 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't see this reducing forfeits. Forfeits are caused by people not being interested long enough to finish a debate and none of these help to maintain interest. All they do is alienate people that may have had forfeit issues in the past when others will not accept debates from them, thus lowering their interest in the site further.
"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
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:31:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/26/2013 3:17:10 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't see this reducing forfeits. Forfeits are caused by people not being interested long enough to finish a debate and none of these help to maintain interest.

Right now, there's no downside, no negative feedback when you forfeit. This would establish expectation and motivation.

Also, loss of interest isn't all that's going on. There are people who start debate after debate against the same person, and only post in the first round, with both sides letting the later rounds time out. They may be establishing voting privileges, establishing sock puppets for vote bombing, or establishing accounts to stuff the ballot box in the presidential election so they can (heh) loot the treasury, fulfilling class requirements, or something else. But they're not bored.

All they do is alienate people that may have had forfeit issues in the past when others will not accept debates from them, thus lowering their interest in the site further.

Great point! Let's start with a clean slate. The only forfeits counting against you should be those that occur after the new policy starts.

Since it's an automatic system, it will only count letting the clock run out as a forfeit. If you post, "Have to forfeit, sorry," that won't count as a forfeit.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2013 3:56:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/26/2013 3:31:57 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 10/26/2013 3:17:10 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I don't see this reducing forfeits. Forfeits are caused by people not being interested long enough to finish a debate and none of these help to maintain interest.

Right now, there's no downside, no negative feedback when you forfeit. This would establish expectation and motivation.

Also, loss of interest isn't all that's going on. There are people who start debate after debate against the same person, and only post in the first round, with both sides letting the later rounds time out. They may be establishing voting privileges, establishing sock puppets for vote bombing, or establishing accounts to stuff the ballot box in the presidential election so they can (heh) loot the treasury, fulfilling class requirements, or something else. But they're not bored.

I just jumped to page 5 of my debates and looked at all 14 debates on that page (one was a source, not a real debate). There were 6 debates where my opponent forfeited at least one round and of those 5 of them became inactive on the site shortly after.

The only one that didn't was Tim_Spin (Socialpinko).

If I look at my page 1, of my last 15 debates, again 6 of them have had forfeits and 5 of them are from members who left the site shortly after. And the 1 forfeit that wasn't from someone that went inactive only forfeited a round because of a temp ban.

There are some that do that to get voting privileges but the vast majority is from they have a fleeting desire for debate that is nothing more than a whim, and they don't realize that they won't be interested in a week or two.

Also, I believe that most people trying to set up multi-accounts debate themselves and often finish those debates, so they would not be caught by this.


All they do is alienate people that may have had forfeit issues in the past when others will not accept debates from them, thus lowering their interest in the site further.

Great point! Let's start with a clean slate. The only forfeits counting against you should be those that occur after the new policy starts.

Since it's an automatic system, it will only count letting the clock run out as a forfeit. If you post, "Have to forfeit, sorry," that won't count as a forfeit.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2013 12:09:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/27/2013 11:32:15 AM, Citrakayah wrote:
What if you forfeited one round, but answered all the other round and had superior arguments?

I'd vote for you. I might vote for you if you forfeited all but one of the rounds, if you still had the better argument.

But, under the system I outlined above, your debate could not be recorded as a win. It would be either a loss (if people mostly voted against you) or a forfeit (if it would otherwise have been a win or a tie). Plus, if you didn't have voting status yet, the number of debates you have to complete before voting would go up.

I would entertain a tweak, if you prefer it: We could say that a single-round forfeit would not count against you in debates of four rounds or more.

We could tweak it any number of ways. For every ten debates, one of your forfeits goes away?

With these tweaks, the tendency to forfeit would still drop dramatically.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2013 1:27:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I like the idea, with the tweak that a single-round forfeit in a debate with four or more rounds is overlooked.

It wouldn't solve the basic problem, which is that DDO is 75% of the way towards being a hit-and-run social networking site in which debating is unimportant, but, hey, it would be a plus to the few debaters who are left.
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2013 11:26:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think this is a great idea. It could use some refining, as others have noted, but DDO should definitely move ahead on this idea.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...