Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Stricter Guidelines for debating

dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 7:52:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm pretty fed up with the terrible debates going on around here. I believe there should be stricter guidelines for debates and stricter punishments for posting a string of forfeited/terrible debates. Have any suggestions?
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 7:56:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 7:52:48 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
I'm pretty fed up with the terrible debates going on around here. I believe there should be stricter guidelines for debates and stricter punishments for posting a string of forfeited/terrible debates. Have any suggestions?

Sure, stop trying to over regulate things!
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:21:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 7:56:56 PM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 12/19/2013 7:52:48 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
I'm pretty fed up with the terrible debates going on around here. I believe there should be stricter guidelines for debates and stricter punishments for posting a string of forfeited/terrible debates. Have any suggestions?

Sure, stop trying to over regulate things!

Take a look at the voting period...
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
TorqueDork
Posts: 14
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:24:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I agree, more than half of my debates have been forfeits. Perhaps we can make it there is a beginner, intermediate, and expert debate categories and you have to apply to get into intermediate and expert.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:38:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.

For personal, yes. But I feel we need to ban some others from debating after the recent onslaught of some troll.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:40:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:38:57 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.

For personal, yes. But I feel we need to ban some others from debating after the recent onslaught of some troll.

Oh, go home.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:41:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:40:27 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:38:57 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.

For personal, yes. But I feel we need to ban some others from debating after the recent onslaught of some troll.

Oh, go home.

I am at home
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ore_Ele, what do you think of the practice of instigators starting debates only to immediately announce that as a condition of accepting the debate, the contender has the BOP? Does this not interfere with one of the intentions of the ELO system?
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:44:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Ore_Ele, what do you think of the practice of instigators starting debates only to immediately announce that as a condition of accepting the debate, the contender has the BOP? Does this not interfere with one of the intentions of the ELO system?

That's unfair, kinda. I might've done that in a few debates.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:50:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Ore_Ele, what do you think of the practice of instigators starting debates only to immediately announce that as a condition of accepting the debate, the contender has the BOP? Does this not interfere with one of the intentions of the ELO system?

I have no problem with it. The instigator can state whatever they want and if Con accepts, then they accept.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 9:05:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:50:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Ore_Ele, what do you think of the practice of instigators starting debates only to immediately announce that as a condition of accepting the debate, the contender has the BOP? Does this not interfere with one of the intentions of the ELO system?

I have no problem with it. The instigator can state whatever they want and if Con accepts, then they accept.

I suppose that's true. But if the ELO system is shifted towards instigators, doesn't one undermine the ELO regime by initiating a debate, only to then effectively serve as the contender (particularly in debates like my bestiality debate where I've agreed not to say anything in the last round) while making the contender effectively serve as the instigator?

Personally, I don't care either way, but it seems like an exploit nonetheless. Then again, this all assumes that the voters actually read the debate. =D
2-D
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 9:49:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.
2-D
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 10:05:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Personally, I don't care either way, but it seems like an exploit nonetheless. Then again, this all assumes that the voters actually read the debate. =D

I like the idea of being able to designate an ELO minimum for voters or allowing only specific voters. This should be visible to anyone accepting the debate. Also I think giving greater weight to experienced or high ELO voters would help the system. Any inspiration to vote, such as factoring strong voters into ELO somehow, would also be an improvement imo. I'm not completely sure how it is currently calculated currently and would appreciate a link.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 12:59:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 9:05:17 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:50:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:42:05 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Ore_Ele, what do you think of the practice of instigators starting debates only to immediately announce that as a condition of accepting the debate, the contender has the BOP? Does this not interfere with one of the intentions of the ELO system?

I have no problem with it. The instigator can state whatever they want and if Con accepts, then they accept.

I suppose that's true. But if the ELO system is shifted towards instigators, doesn't one undermine the ELO regime by initiating a debate, only to then effectively serve as the contender (particularly in debates like my bestiality debate where I've agreed not to say anything in the last round) while making the contender effectively serve as the instigator?

Personally, I don't care either way, but it seems like an exploit nonetheless. Then again, this all assumes that the voters actually read the debate. =D

The instigator adjustment is to compensate for the contender advantage. The advantage is not due to the BOP, but rather to the contender having the last word in the debate and the ability to not accept a debate unless they are confident in the topic against the opponent (while the instigator can only have confidence in the topic, not against the opponent).

The thing that actually has the greatest "loophole" is making a debate unacceptable and being able to pick your opponent. Though that is only done to get a high quality opponent, and not really exploited as a loophole (though I might have found a pretty study way of doing it).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
lannan13
Posts: 23,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 7:29:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 7:52:48 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
I'm pretty fed up with the terrible debates going on around here. I believe there should be stricter guidelines for debates and stricter punishments for posting a string of forfeited/terrible debates. Have any suggestions?

Terrible debates on DDO is like girl fights at school, they are fun to watch and should just happen. You see terrible debates on DDO like trolling debates need to be around more often because it helps make the site what it is today. You also have people on this site that are famous for it like Imabench for the prime example.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 3:09:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:34:42 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
There are two easy ways this can be done.

1) change the debate restrictions to ELO max and min fill in the blanks.

2) add a debate restriction that is just "more than 3 debates."

This would allow you to greater customize your debates and have better control on who can accept them.

These are very good ideas. I tried a debate with "don't accept this debate unless your Elo is over 2800," and it worked for that one try.

I don't have a problem with the Instigator putting any restrictions he wants. The challenger voluntarily accepts them. However, the debaters cannot bind voter. One debate declared that S+G wouldn't count, the challenger agreed -- and proceeded to be nearly incomprehensible. Voters should view such voting agreements as no more than suggestions.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 3:32:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM, Beverlee wrote:
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.

Yes, but what about the fact that you can then change your vote once you've seen who it is?

What about the comments section that a debater may post on?

But I do agree that it would make it more unbiased.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
2-D
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 4:53:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM, Beverlee wrote:
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.

Now that is an interesting idea. It would be a great option to make a blind debate so that voters will not know the identity of debaters until after the voting period. It would be interesting to keep both Pro and Con blind throughout the process as well.

One problem is that these debates could not appear on profiles and it would be difficult to drum up voters without revealing identities.

With the current vote reporting system and RFD requirements an option for anonymous voting could be a solution.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 5:27:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 4:53:26 PM, 2-D wrote:
At 12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM, Beverlee wrote:
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.

Now that is an interesting idea. It would be a great option to make a blind debate so that voters will not know the identity of debaters until after the voting period. It would be interesting to keep both Pro and Con blind throughout the process as well.

One problem is that these debates could not appear on profiles and it would be difficult to drum up voters without revealing identities.

With the current vote reporting system and RFD requirements an option for anonymous voting could be a solution.

I understand that most members are too new to know what DDO was like back when we had anonymous voting (almost 4 years ago now). So let me show you a few.

You have votes like this

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

And voters like this

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

You may notice that this member likes to vote on one particular person's debates and always against her.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
2-D
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 5:47:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 5:27:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/21/2013 4:53:26 PM, 2-D wrote:
At 12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM, Beverlee wrote:
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.

Now that is an interesting idea. It would be a great option to make a blind debate so that voters will not know the identity of debaters until after the voting period. It would be interesting to keep both Pro and Con blind throughout the process as well.

One problem is that these debates could not appear on profiles and it would be difficult to drum up voters without revealing identities.

With the current vote reporting system and RFD requirements an option for anonymous voting could be a solution.

I understand that most members are too new to know what DDO was like back when we had anonymous voting (almost 4 years ago now). So let me show you a few.

You have votes like this

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

And voters like this

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

You may notice that this member likes to vote on one particular person's debates and always against her.

Yes, I hadn't considered that a grudge against another member could cause real problems here with anonymous voting, especially when debates conclude with only a couple votes. RFDs would help but this may not be at all practical right now as a site change.

A site like this does depend on members to police the site through reporting so I agree anonymous voting would cause some real issues but it could still be an interesting option for debates. Anonymous debaters, is also an interesting idea as an option. In general I'm just Pro for more possibilities in setting up a debate to experiment and customize.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:03:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 5:47:01 PM, 2-D wrote:
At 12/21/2013 5:27:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 12/21/2013 4:53:26 PM, 2-D wrote:
At 12/21/2013 3:22:27 PM, Beverlee wrote:
It wouldn't help the debates themselves, but I think blind voting is a good idea. I don't vote on debates that have my friends on them too often because I don't want to hurt their feelings. It would be better for people like me if we did not know the identities of the debaters until after we vote.

Now that is an interesting idea. It would be a great option to make a blind debate so that voters will not know the identity of debaters until after the voting period. It would be interesting to keep both Pro and Con blind throughout the process as well.

One problem is that these debates could not appear on profiles and it would be difficult to drum up voters without revealing identities.

With the current vote reporting system and RFD requirements an option for anonymous voting could be a solution.

I understand that most members are too new to know what DDO was like back when we had anonymous voting (almost 4 years ago now). So let me show you a few.

You have votes like this

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

And voters like this

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

You may notice that this member likes to vote on one particular person's debates and always against her.

Yes, I hadn't considered that a grudge against another member could cause real problems here with anonymous voting, especially when debates conclude with only a couple votes. RFDs would help but this may not be at all practical right now as a site change.

A site like this does depend on members to police the site through reporting so I agree anonymous voting would cause some real issues but it could still be an interesting option for debates. Anonymous debaters, is also an interesting idea as an option. In general I'm just Pro for more possibilities in setting up a debate to experiment and customize.

I agree with the anonymous debaters as an option. It has pluses and negatives. It would be great for more experienced debaters that don't want people to run from them, that way they can actually start debates (many of the old debaters only accept debates, they are rarely instigators). Though it does hurt one's ability to advertise them (though they may still do so via PM with their friends).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Seek
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:48:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Is there any way to currently land a decent debate if you're new and literate?

Because I'm coming up with nothing right now.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:52:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 6:48:29 PM, Seek wrote:
Is there any way to currently land a decent debate if you're new and literate?

Because I'm coming up with nothing right now.

That depends on what you're seeking (sorry, couldn't resist). You can sign up for the new members tourny. There should be a number of decent debates in that. Another would be to find members that have debated a topic you are interested in and PMing them if they would like a challenge to that topic (don't just send a challenge, many people think it is rude to challenge without asking first).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 6:53:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 6:48:29 PM, Seek wrote:
Is there any way to currently land a decent debate if you're new and literate?

Because I'm coming up with nothing right now.

When I was new, I would find people in the forums and challenge them over disagreements.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
James.Price
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/22/2013 2:10:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I would like to have the idea of concealing the identities of the debaters until the scoring has been completed seriously considered.

I feel that this small change could have a positive cascading effect for the credibility of the voting system. If baby steps are preferred, the instigator could set this as one of the debate parameters, perhaps with the ELO still visible.