Total Posts:99|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Beverlee is debating in the comment section

GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:46:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Only if the votes are persuaded by the comments. And since that's impossible to verify for certain...

If you'd like I will read through the debate and vote myself. That's not a guarantee I'll be voting for you, just that you'll have another vote that isn't reading the comments section.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:48:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:46:56 AM, Zaradi wrote:
Only if the votes are persuaded by the comments. And since that's impossible to verify for certain...

If you'd like I will read through the debate and vote myself. That's not a guarantee I'll be voting for you, just that you'll have another vote that isn't reading the comments section.

Much appreciated! If you have any debates that need votes, just let me know.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:48:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
No. What she did is absolutely not allowed.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:49:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'll vote as well.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:30:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:49:11 AM, phantom wrote:
I'll vote as well.

Thanks to everyone who voted! Too many debates get no votes at all, but this one got 10 even though it's really long!

I have another debate that has 0 votes, but it's on Cow Milk VS Soy Milk so I guess no one is really interested in that lol

Much easier read than the Minimum Wage debate, though, so if anyone cares to vote on that one too... I'm playing Devil's Advocate, but I think I still won =D

If anyone has any debates without votes, send me a message!
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:39:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...

My RFD was: "Pro argued in the comments section, which is against DDO standards and is considered a forfeiture from the debate, so she loses both conduct and arguments."

DDO standards, as you know, are not rules but simply common beliefs and practices. In other words, there is no rule against plagiarism but I can vote against someone for plagiarizing given that I believe it goes against DDO standards. My Rules and Regulations are simply an attempt to write down the DDO standards down as that removes any controversy on how or where they should be applied, assuming that my opponent accepts the rules presented beforehand. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean I cannot base my other votes on DDO standards if the debate voted on is not based on the NDRE.
Bullish
Posts: 3,527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:41:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:30:20 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:49:11 AM, phantom wrote:
I'll vote as well.

Thanks to everyone who voted! Too many debates get no votes at all, but this one got 10 even though it's really long!

I have another debate that has 0 votes, but it's on Cow Milk VS Soy Milk so I guess no one is really interested in that lol

Soy milk is gooood.

Much easier read than the Minimum Wage debate, though, so if anyone cares to vote on that one too... I'm playing Devil's Advocate, but I think I still won =D

If anyone has any debates without votes, send me a message!
0x5f3759df
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:43:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:39:09 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...

My RFD was: "Pro argued in the comments section, which is against DDO standards and is considered a forfeiture from the debate, so she loses both conduct and arguments."

DDO standards, as you know, are not rules but simply common beliefs and practices.

Semantics. If anything they're synonymous in the way you're defining them.

Moreover, I can guarantee you that arguing in the comments section is NOT a forfeiture by DDO standards/rules/whatever you wanna call it. If anything it's a violation of conduct point, at worst. Pointless because if you're voting you shouldn't be reading it at most relevant.

That's not to say that debating and arguing in the comments section during the voting period is acceptable. It's not a good thing at all. But it's sure as hell not a forfeiture.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:46:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:41:19 AM, Bullish wrote:
Soy milk is gooood.

Ew, I tried it once and I think it's nasty although mostly bland.

Here's the debate if you are interested:

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

=D

The resolution was: Cow's Milk is superior to Soy Milk
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:08:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:43:44 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:39:09 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...

My RFD was: "Pro argued in the comments section, which is against DDO standards and is considered a forfeiture from the debate, so she loses both conduct and arguments."

DDO standards, as you know, are not rules but simply common beliefs and practices.

Semantics. If anything they're synonymous in the way you're defining them.

Moreover, I can guarantee you that arguing in the comments section is NOT a forfeiture by DDO standards/rules/whatever you wanna call it. If anything it's a violation of conduct point, at worst. Pointless because if you're voting you shouldn't be reading it at most relevant.

That's not to say that debating and arguing in the comments section during the voting period is acceptable. It's not a good thing at all. But it's sure as hell not a forfeiture.

I see your point, but that's not how I look at it. The original debate was four rounds with equal turns for Pro and Con. Beverlee argued one extra turn in the comment section, by that starting another debate which is not like the original one which was only limited to four rounds. I think that's forfeiture from the original debate as she did not abide by its rules and conditions, but started a debate which is different than the original one to affect the voting results. It's like having a boxing match where it is agreed to have four rounds, and then having the four before one of the participants decides to wait for his opponent to turn his back to resume the boxing match, while that goes against the initial conditions of the fight. To me, the attacker did not like the results of the four rounds so he forfeited from the agreement and started another fight with an advantage on his opponent. It's subjective whether you call that forfeiture or not, but I mean that when I say 'forfeiture' and not literal forfeiture as in not submitting a round, and such cheap-shots are enough for me to award the next person the three points for arguments.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:14:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:08:17 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:43:44 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:39:09 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...

My RFD was: "Pro argued in the comments section, which is against DDO standards and is considered a forfeiture from the debate, so she loses both conduct and arguments."

DDO standards, as you know, are not rules but simply common beliefs and practices.

Semantics. If anything they're synonymous in the way you're defining them.

Moreover, I can guarantee you that arguing in the comments section is NOT a forfeiture by DDO standards/rules/whatever you wanna call it. If anything it's a violation of conduct point, at worst. Pointless because if you're voting you shouldn't be reading it at most relevant.

That's not to say that debating and arguing in the comments section during the voting period is acceptable. It's not a good thing at all. But it's sure as hell not a forfeiture.

I see your point, but that's not how I look at it. The original debate was four rounds with equal turns for Pro and Con. Beverlee argued one extra turn in the comment section, by that starting another debate which is not like the original one which was only limited to four rounds. I think that's forfeiture from the original debate as she did not abide by its rules and conditions, but started a debate which is different than the original one to affect the voting results. It's like having a boxing match where it is agreed to have four rounds, and then having the four before one of the participants decides to wait for his opponent to turn his back to resume the boxing match, while that goes against the initial conditions of the fight. To me, the attacker did not like the results of the four rounds so he forfeited from the agreement and started another fight with an advantage on his opponent. It's subjective whether you call that forfeiture or not, but I mean that when I say 'forfeiture' and not literal forfeiture as in not submitting a round, and such cheap-shots are enough for me to award the next person the three points for arguments.

This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:29:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:14:09 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:08:17 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:43:44 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:39:09 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:30:34 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 9:08:44 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:39:27 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Is that allowed?
She posted that comment when she was losing, and now's she's winning by 2 points because she started debating again the comment section.

There is no rule against arguing in the comments section or arguing with the voters... So I made a Rule and Regulations document which my opponent has to accept that deals with such issues.

So then why did you say there was in your RFD?

NDRE Lv.1.5 Strict: http://www.debate.org...

My RFD was: "Pro argued in the comments section, which is against DDO standards and is considered a forfeiture from the debate, so she loses both conduct and arguments."

DDO standards, as you know, are not rules but simply common beliefs and practices.

Semantics. If anything they're synonymous in the way you're defining them.

Moreover, I can guarantee you that arguing in the comments section is NOT a forfeiture by DDO standards/rules/whatever you wanna call it. If anything it's a violation of conduct point, at worst. Pointless because if you're voting you shouldn't be reading it at most relevant.

That's not to say that debating and arguing in the comments section during the voting period is acceptable. It's not a good thing at all. But it's sure as hell not a forfeiture.

I see your point, but that's not how I look at it. The original debate was four rounds with equal turns for Pro and Con. Beverlee argued one extra turn in the comment section, by that starting another debate which is not like the original one which was only limited to four rounds. I think that's forfeiture from the original debate as she did not abide by its rules and conditions, but started a debate which is different than the original one to affect the voting results. It's like having a boxing match where it is agreed to have four rounds, and then having the four before one of the participants decides to wait for his opponent to turn his back to resume the boxing match, while that goes against the initial conditions of the fight. To me, the attacker did not like the results of the four rounds so he forfeited from the agreement and started another fight with an advantage on his opponent. It's subjective whether you call that forfeiture or not, but I mean that when I say 'forfeiture' and not literal forfeiture as in not submitting a round, and such cheap-shots are enough for me to award the next person the three points for arguments.

This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Personally, I'd like to see a debate on this subject. If you two could have a 3-4 round debate on the matter, that'd be great!
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:51:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.

I did change my vote based on your vote-bullying. If you have any other complaints, I'll update it again.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:54:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:51:15 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.

I did change my vote based on your vote-bullying. If you have any other complaints, I'll update it again.

So freaking troll.

Whatever man. If you want to be that one biased prick who skews the debates he votes on without reading them (That whole BOP being shared thing even though it was accepted that Con had BOP in round one lol), then go for it. You're not gonna get any respect from the site, but you're free to do so.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:00:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:54:11 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:51:15 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.

I did change my vote based on your vote-bullying. If you have any other complaints, I'll update it again.

So freaking troll.

Whatever man. If you want to be that one biased prick who skews the debates he votes on without reading them (That whole BOP being shared thing even though it was accepted that Con had BOP in round one lol), then go for it. You're not gonna get any respect from the site, but you're free to do so.

"The Burden of Proof will lie on Con, since he will argue against estalished[sic] precedent."

Oh, God. She made a spelling error. I think I can update my vote again... Thanks love.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:02:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:00:53 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:54:11 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:51:15 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.

I did change my vote based on your vote-bullying. If you have any other complaints, I'll update it again.

So freaking troll.

Whatever man. If you want to be that one biased prick who skews the debates he votes on without reading them (That whole BOP being shared thing even though it was accepted that Con had BOP in round one lol), then go for it. You're not gonna get any respect from the site, but you're free to do so.

"The Burden of Proof will lie on Con, since he will argue against estalished[sic] precedent."

Oh, God. She made a spelling error. I think I can update my vote again... Thanks love.

Like I said, so freaking troll.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
James.Price
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:15:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I was asked to look at this thread, and I am glad that I have. Votes such as those described here are the original reason I left this site, which is otherwise fairly rewarding.

Votes that are based on anything other than the arguments presented in the formal section of the debate should be invalidated. Voters who degrade the integrity of the debating process should have their actions reviewed. Debates that have concluded their "Voting Periods" with such improper votes should not be set in stone, but also subject to re-evaluation.

I note that those outraged by "Comments Section" arguments are (themselves) also arguing in the comments sections. This causes me to wonder if the sin is really as outrageous to them as they claim. I also note, with contempt, the obvious ploy of vote-trading that was seen here. (Thank you for voting for me - let me know if you need me to vote for you.)

I have already left this site due almost entirely to the disrespect that this style of voting introduces, and have only partially returned. This thread justifies that decision.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:23:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:02:00 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 11:00:53 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:54:11 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:51:15 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:47:17 AM, Zaradi wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:28:12 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
This is literally the most idiotic position I think I've ever seen someone hold in regards to this issue. Your analogies don't make any sense, less of all they don't support your conclusion. The logic behind your position doesn't make any kind of sense, a cheap shot proves that you're a sh*tty person, not that you didn't win.

I'm done trying to coddle you to show you the idiocy in your position. You're blatantly using your fallacious "standards" that you even admit don't apply to those who don't accept your judging of what DDO standards are to votebomb. There's no other reason for your vote other than "she argues in the comments section, which is a forfeiture". No analysis on the debate, over arguments, over anything.

I have reported your vote, and will defend that it's a vote-bomb against anyone who believes otherwise.

Out of respect, I won't be equally scathing but simply leave it here...

Screw respect. Go ahead. The only reason I dish it out is because I can take it being dished back. Do you have any defense for yourself? Anything to say at all? If not change your vote.

I did change my vote based on your vote-bullying. If you have any other complaints, I'll update it again.

So freaking troll.

Whatever man. If you want to be that one biased prick who skews the debates he votes on without reading them (That whole BOP being shared thing even though it was accepted that Con had BOP in round one lol), then go for it. You're not gonna get any respect from the site, but you're free to do so.

"The Burden of Proof will lie on Con, since he will argue against estalished[sic] precedent."

Oh, God. She made a spelling error. I think I can update my vote again... Thanks love.

Like I said, so freaking troll.

It's not trolling at all, why you would make such an assumption is beyond me. If you don't agree that it is a forfeit if one starts a debate in the comment section that itself retracts from the original agreement to have four rounds, then that is your opinion. I simply have a different view. I think we both can agree that conduct needs to have more than one point as arguing in the comment section can have direct effects on the voting (many points going to Pro instead of Con, for example).

I have better things to do than argue over this. Have a good one.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:25:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:15:44 AM, James.Price wrote:
I was asked to look at this thread, and I am glad that I have. Votes such as those described here are the original reason I left this site, which is otherwise fairly rewarding.

Votes that are based on anything other than the arguments presented in the formal section of the debate should be invalidated. Voters who degrade the integrity of the debating process should have their actions reviewed. Debates that have concluded their "Voting Periods" with such improper votes should not be set in stone, but also subject to re-evaluation.

I note that those outraged by "Comments Section" arguments are (themselves) also arguing in the comments sections. This causes me to wonder if the sin is really as outrageous to them as they claim. I also note, with contempt, the obvious ploy of vote-trading that was seen here. (Thank you for voting for me - let me know if you need me to vote for you.)

I have already left this site due almost entirely to the disrespect that this style of voting introduces, and have only partially returned. This thread justifies that decision.

I didn't argue in the comments. I also did not vote-trade, not in the negative sense of the word.

If anyone who has voted for OR against me in this debate needs me to vote on one of their debates, I will return the favor. I never guaranteed that I'll vote for their position, though.

I don't appreciate your accusations.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
James.Price
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:26:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:25:19 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 11:15:44 AM, James.Price wrote:
I was asked to look at this thread, and I am glad that I have. Votes such as those described here are the original reason I left this site, which is otherwise fairly rewarding.

Votes that are based on anything other than the arguments presented in the formal section of the debate should be invalidated. Voters who degrade the integrity of the debating process should have their actions reviewed. Debates that have concluded their "Voting Periods" with such improper votes should not be set in stone, but also subject to re-evaluation.

I note that those outraged by "Comments Section" arguments are (themselves) also arguing in the comments sections. This causes me to wonder if the sin is really as outrageous to them as they claim. I also note, with contempt, the obvious ploy of vote-trading that was seen here. (Thank you for voting for me - let me know if you need me to vote for you.)

I have already left this site due almost entirely to the disrespect that this style of voting introduces, and have only partially returned. This thread justifies that decision.

I didn't argue in the comments. I also did not vote-trade, not in the negative sense of the word.

If anyone who has voted for OR against me in this debate needs me to vote on one of their debates, I will return the favor. I never guaranteed that I'll vote for their position, though.

I don't appreciate your accusations.

Of course not.

Yet here we are, apple-bobbing for some more votes for you. Not in the comments section, of course. That would be different.
James.Price
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:28:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I restate:

Any votes not based solely on the merits of the arguments presented in the formal section of the debate should be subject to review. This is the definition of improper voting.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:29:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:26:56 AM, James.Price wrote:
Yet here we are, apple-bobbing for some more votes for you. Not in the comments section, of course. That would be different.

The score went up from like 21-19 to 29-30 since I made this thread.

I don't see how that qualifies as apple-bobbing, especially since people in this thread have voted for AND against me.

If you don't like how voting is going, why don't you read the debate and vote on it yourself?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:31:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:15:44 AM, James.Price wrote:
I was asked to look at this thread, and I am glad that I have. Votes such as those described here are the original reason I left this site, which is otherwise fairly rewarding.

Votes that are based on anything other than the arguments presented in the formal section of the debate should be invalidated. Voters who degrade the integrity of the debating process should have their actions reviewed. Debates that have concluded their "Voting Periods" with such improper votes should not be set in stone, but also subject to re-evaluation.

I note that those outraged by "Comments Section" arguments are (themselves) also arguing in the comments sections. This causes me to wonder if the sin is really as outrageous to them as they claim. I also note, with contempt, the obvious ploy of vote-trading that was seen here. (Thank you for voting for me - let me know if you need me to vote for you.)

I have already left this site due almost entirely to the disrespect that this style of voting introduces, and have only partially returned. This thread justifies that decision.

In this case, one of the participants literally continued the debate with an additional round in the comments section against a relatively new user who days ago asked how to vote... The one who began the fire is to blame in this case, as she literally provided an additional round with an RFD style when Con gets the last say in that particular debate.

Moreover, you seem to be very idealistic. I personally don't think much about the votes. I've seen many debaters lose debates they actually won just because their opponent is popular or good at rhetoric. That, to me, means nothing and would not make me leave the website.. The winner is the one who simply made better arguments and had better organization.
James.Price
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:32:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:29:44 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 11:26:56 AM, James.Price wrote:
Yet here we are, apple-bobbing for some more votes for you. Not in the comments section, of course. That would be different.

The score went up from like 21-19 to 29-30 since I made this thread.

I don't see how that qualifies as apple-bobbing, especially since people in this thread have voted for AND against me.

If you don't like how voting is going, why don't you read the debate and vote on it yourself?

I feel that I am too biased to vote on this debate.

You presented this thread in the closing moments of the debate, in order to solicit more attention to your cause. Your actions are identical to those of your partner in every way except proximity.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,121
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:33:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:23:40 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:

You're right Niqash. It's certainly not troll if you're imposing your own views on a debate that doesn't support your views. It's certainly not troll to falsely assume what the common practice of DDO is without any kind of justification and use it to disguise blatant vote bombing. It's certainly not troll to increase the severity of it every time you are called out on your votebombing. And it's most definitely not troll that to spite me on calling you out on being wrong you punish someone else instead of the person calling you out.

Nope. Nothing troll about what's going on here. I don't know why I would ever accuse you of such a thing. I'm truly, truly sorry. Will you ever forgive me master? Perhaps, if it pleases you, you could impart your vast wisdom of DDO and of voting to me?
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...