Total Posts:30|Showing Posts:1-30
Jump to topic:

People don't know how to vote on sources

phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 12:43:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Source points are an eternal frustration. People constantly abuse them, usually by mistake but often thoughtlessly nonetheless. Source points do not go to whoever had more sources, or even necessarily who had better sources. Someone who used half the sources of his opponent can win on sources, and even if his sources were not as correct or scientific. Sources go to who provided sources of the adequate number and adequate quality in regards to what his own specific arguments required (assuming his opponent did not).

Sources are directly related to arguments. If I make an entirely philosophical argument, it's very likely I might use one source, or no source at all. If my opponent responds in an extremely scientific based way, he'll probably use allot of sources. My philosophical argument requires few sources, whereas his scientific arguments probably require a significant amount. Therefore, he needs to source more often than I do because his claims are of the kind that need some sort of credible backing. If one participant uses five sources, it could still be that he needed sources in five more places where he did not provide any. His opponent might only make claims that require in all one or two sources and provide them every time. Even though the former provided more sources, it's extremely evident that the latter was much better in regards to sourcing. In reality the former would probably get the source points because people don't know how to fvcking vote.

Sources should be used when one side neglects to provide sources to arguments and claims that require them, or when one side's sources are not credible enough to support the claims they are meant to support (assuming his opponent's sourcing was adequate), not when one side provides more sources than his opponent or even necessarily when one side provides more firm sources (a blog or forum thread might be OK for some claims and don't in themselves warrant lose of source points. It all depends on the claim they are backing).
"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 12:55:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:50:16 PM, Logical-Master wrote:
Eyes and beholders man. Eyes and beholders.

What?
"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)
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 12:57:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Phantom raises a good point. I think if someone truly read the debate and the sources however, this wouldn't be an issue. I try to only vote where applicable to avoid this type of thing. Source votes should really only be cast when relevant and important to the debate.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
thett3
Posts: 14,344
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 1:07:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

I agree! Maybe cut down everything else to 1 point and let argument points have the rest.

Generally what I do when voting on sources is look to see who had the most .edu and .gov sources in comparison to others. Citing Wiki will usually encourage me to deduct a source point.

If they seem to be sourcing things just for the sake of sources, I don't count that.

The only time I actually read the sources is if the opponent questions their validity.

Even in a philosophical argument, though, one would be better off citing an expert in that particular field of philosophy, I think.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 1:51:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't really think there's much of a wrong way of determining who has the most reliable sources, although I do agree that blindly giving it to whoever posts the most sources is something that should be discouraged. Nevertheless, it's a pretty subjective affair.
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:07:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

Conduct is definitely a part of real-life debate. And how would you scale that down anyway? It's only worth one point.

S&G is the online equivalent of enunciation, diction, poise, etc. In real-life debate whoever has the most speech points wins in the event of a tie. And again, how would you scale it down?

Also, if someone presents a statistic and is unable to provide a source when challenged to do so, that is an automatic loss in debate.

At least that's how things worked in my league.
"Most of the coldness in the world is actually just people teaching lessons about the coldness in the world. And it does not remove blame from the people cranking the AC." -Ore_Ele

"You see, Adam never spoke about theology. He just had sex with Eve and died." -1970vu
Logical-Master
Posts: 2,538
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:12:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

No, you aren't alone. That's how it originally was on this site. Perhaps there should simply be a separate column for conduct/sources/spelling/etc and there could be additional leader boards for that. Indeed, someone could be at the top of the "conduct" leaderboard", but in the middle of the convincing arguments leaderboard.
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:56:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

+1
yay842
Posts: 5,680
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:01:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:56:05 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

+1

+1
30 Important Life Lessons
http://www.debate.org...
20 Terrifying Two-Sentence Horrors
http://www.debate.org...
20 Jokes That Only Geniuses Will Understand
http://www.debate.org...
Name One Song That Can't Match This GIF
http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 10:48:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I just found out they made the character limit 10k. That means I can source spam again! If I want to.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
xXCryptoXx
Posts: 5,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:20:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 10:48:26 PM, 16kadams wrote:
I just found out they made the character limit 10k. That means I can source spam again! If I want to.

only you could source spam 2000 characters
Nolite Timere
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 11:21:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 11:20:00 PM, xXCryptoXx wrote:
At 1/3/2014 10:48:26 PM, 16kadams wrote:
I just found out they made the character limit 10k. That means I can source spam again! If I want to.

only you could source spam 2000 characters

I am better now, come on.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
kawaii_crazy
Posts: 580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 12:40:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
"Please keep in mind that voting is a privilege and that all votes should be thoughtful and be placed with a proper RFD explaining every point that you award. Displaying poor voting conduct may result in having your votes or voting privileges removed.

Have fun and enjoy the site.

If you have any further concerns, questions, comments or need anything at all, always feel free to get in contact with me."
~Airmax

I hate votebombing and unfair voting.
"Being called weird is like being called Limited Edition. Meaning you're something people don't see that often." -Ashley Purdy

Please help raise money for a Christmas gift for airmax (although he is Jewish, as YYW pointed out). He is in desperate need of a new laptop, and he has done so much for this site; he certainly deserves one. :)
http://www.debate.org...
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 1:58:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:43:18 PM, phantom wrote:
Source points are an eternal frustration. People constantly abuse them, usually by mistake but often thoughtlessly nonetheless. Source points do not go to whoever had more sources, or even necessarily who had better sources. Someone who used half the sources of his opponent can win on sources, and even if his sources were not as correct or scientific. Sources go to who provided sources of the adequate number and adequate quality in regards to what his own specific arguments required (assuming his opponent did not).

Sources are directly related to arguments. If I make an entirely philosophical argument, it's very likely I might use one source, or no source at all. If my opponent responds in an extremely scientific based way, he'll probably use allot of sources. My philosophical argument requires few sources, whereas his scientific arguments probably require a significant amount. Therefore, he needs to source more often than I do because his claims are of the kind that need some sort of credible backing. If one participant uses five sources, it could still be that he needed sources in five more places where he did not provide any. His opponent might only make claims that require in all one or two sources and provide them every time. Even though the former provided more sources, it's extremely evident that the latter was much better in regards to sourcing. In reality the former would probably get the source points because people don't know how to fvcking vote.

Sources should be used when one side neglects to provide sources to arguments and claims that require them, or when one side's sources are not credible enough to support the claims they are meant to support (assuming his opponent's sourcing was adequate), not when one side provides more sources than his opponent or even necessarily when one side provides more firm sources (a blog or forum thread might be OK for some claims and don't in themselves warrant lose of source points. It all depends on the claim they are backing).

I was just thinking about posting a topic just like this... I agree with you fully.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 3:32:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points.

I actually like this, even if it is incredibly rare.

In short, it's something of a mirror to idiots like Qopel complaining that they could lose debates even while being "right." Being right isn't what's voted on, if the correct side to an argument failed to actually counter the wrong side.

On a winning argument being able to still lose to the other areas... If I talk like Jar Jar Binks, throw random insults around at my opponent and the audience, both fail to cite anything or even counter my opponents sources; yet somehow have a stronger case than my opponent on the three measurements DDO has us vote for arguments on, well it's quite fair that someone could vote in favor of me on arguments, yet against me on all other areas.
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 2:36:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

If I had a choice, I would only have argument points and the conduct point, but I would be OK if we had only argument points.
"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)
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 6:06:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 2:36:24 PM, phantom wrote:
At 1/3/2014 12:58:51 PM, thett3 wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks the sources vote, and every category save arguments, should be abolished or significantly scaled down? It's ridiculous that someone can win convincing arguments but still lose the ballot if their opponent picks up the other points. In real debate there's only one vote none of this point split nonsense

If I had a choice, I would only have argument points and the conduct point, but I would be OK if we had only argument points.

/thread.

I agree. This might not be the final solution, but it sure as hell getting there.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.
NightofTheLivingCats
Posts: 2,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 6:43:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

Still needs massive reform. People dont know how to vote.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 7:01:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

That's the thing. If you don't back up what you say, you're arguments are not as good, so it factors into the argument points. No need for there to be two additional points for it. Poor sourcing almost always means less credible arguments, which means you're more likely to lose the argument points. I take sources into account. I just don't vote on them because it goes with who I choose to give the argument points to. Neglecting to use sources is already risky enough without two additional points that you might lose.
"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)
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 7:28:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 7:01:53 PM, phantom wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

That's the thing. If you don't back up what you say, you're arguments are not as good, so it factors into the argument points. No need for there to be two additional points for it. Poor sourcing almost always means less credible arguments, which means you're more likely to lose the argument points. I take sources into account. I just don't vote on them because it goes with who I choose to give the argument points to. Neglecting to use sources is already risky enough without two additional points that you might lose.

It lets us be more precise with our score. That is useful, because it helps the debaters understand exactly why they won or lost a judge. Was it my arguments? Not really... Those were good, I just didn't believe what you were saying. So sources. Or... I think I see what you were trying to say, but I couldn't understand it very well because it was so garbled. So spelling and grammar.

I think that we need to get that feedback. These scores help me understand the RFDs in my debates a little better. By working to improve my S&G, back up my claims with solid sources, and conduct myself with a little class, I feel like I'm getting better at debating.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 7:36:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 7:28:02 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 7:01:53 PM, phantom wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

That's the thing. If you don't back up what you say, you're arguments are not as good, so it factors into the argument points. No need for there to be two additional points for it. Poor sourcing almost always means less credible arguments, which means you're more likely to lose the argument points. I take sources into account. I just don't vote on them because it goes with who I choose to give the argument points to. Neglecting to use sources is already risky enough without two additional points that you might lose.

It lets us be more precise with our score. That is useful, because it helps the debaters understand exactly why they won or lost a judge. Was it my arguments? Not really... Those were good, I just didn't believe what you were saying. So sources. Or... I think I see what you were trying to say, but I couldn't understand it very well because it was so garbled. So spelling and grammar.

I think that we need to get that feedback. These scores help me understand the RFDs in my debates a little better. By working to improve my S&G, back up my claims with solid sources, and conduct myself with a little class, I feel like I'm getting better at debating.

Feedback? That's what RFD's are for. You don't have to give someone sources to let him know he had better sources. Simply say it.

Either way, even if it is better in regards to feedback, that does not offset the problem that someone could lose the argument points as well as the source points for bad sourcing. If someone does not source well enough, don't deduct two points; his arguments have already lost credibility. Instead, of giving his opponent sources points, mention that one reason you did not give him arguments was because his sources were not enough to back some of his claims. Two points is a massive penalty for poor sourcing when your poor sourcing has already made you lose three points for arguments.
"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)
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 7:57:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 7:36:56 PM, phantom wrote:
At 1/4/2014 7:28:02 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 7:01:53 PM, phantom wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

That's the thing. If you don't back up what you say, you're arguments are not as good, so it factors into the argument points. No need for there to be two additional points for it. Poor sourcing almost always means less credible arguments, which means you're more likely to lose the argument points. I take sources into account. I just don't vote on them because it goes with who I choose to give the argument points to. Neglecting to use sources is already risky enough without two additional points that you might lose.

It lets us be more precise with our score. That is useful, because it helps the debaters understand exactly why they won or lost a judge. Was it my arguments? Not really... Those were good, I just didn't believe what you were saying. So sources. Or... I think I see what you were trying to say, but I couldn't understand it very well because it was so garbled. So spelling and grammar.

I think that we need to get that feedback. These scores help me understand the RFDs in my debates a little better. By working to improve my S&G, back up my claims with solid sources, and conduct myself with a little class, I feel like I'm getting better at debating.

Feedback? That's what RFD's are for. You don't have to give someone sources to let him know he had better sources. Simply say it.

Either way, even if it is better in regards to feedback, that does not offset the problem that someone could lose the argument points as well as the source points for bad sourcing. If someone does not source well enough, don't deduct two points; his arguments have already lost credibility. Instead, of giving his opponent sources points, mention that one reason you did not give him arguments was because his sources were not enough to back some of his claims. Two points is a massive penalty for poor sourcing when your poor sourcing has already made you lose three points for arguments.

I see what you are saying, but I think that might be a scoring conduct issue. You should differentiate between arguments and sourcing, because that is what the system is asking you to grade on. It is possible to lose sourcing but win arguments. For example, I think I remember someone saying that using Wikipedia was an automatic source penalty for them. Some arguments don't need sources, and sometimes one guy loses arguments due to a fallacy that they used, but still had great sources compared to the other debater.

It's not something that I think we should get rid of, and it's not something that I have a lot of trouble scoring.
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 7:59:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
THANK YOU!!! I always get docked points for not having as much sources as my opponent, or maybe just not having a source at all when none is required. I'm glad you cleared this up.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 8:08:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 6:43:27 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:34:55 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:26:06 PM, NightofTheLivingCats wrote:
At 1/4/2014 6:16:38 PM, Beverlee wrote:
I like the spelling and grammar score. Think of it this way:

You spend nearly a week composing an argument, researching and presenting it. Your opponent puts up a sloppy 7th grade thing that looks like butt. Now, you are not really "debating" anymore. You are just saying things to some kids. And worse yet, new visitors to the site think that this is a waste of time. Besides look how cute we all look, taking our debate with Jr. High kids so seriously.

Eloquence and verbal clarity are important if we want to elevate whatever it is we are doing here to something more prestigious than Facebook comments.

Why don't we kill off sources then?

Well because. We really need to back up some of what we say with evidence.

Still needs massive reform. People dont know how to vote.

The way this website is structured, people do not need to know how to vote in order to vote. They merely need to complete 3 debates.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?