Total Posts:43|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Vote-bullying or vote-correcting?

NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:26:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Vote-bullying or vote-correcting? That is the question.

If someone responds to an RFD by offering rebuttals and asking for clarifications while in the voting period, what would you call that?

For me, it usually creates an atmosphere of hatred and distrust as....

(1) The voter feels personally offended.

(2) The other debater feels a need to argue as if something is being stolen from him, perhaps a vote.

(3) The voter might engage in a comment-war with one of the participants.

(4) The voter might be discouraged from voting because some of his votes are getting him into problems and comment-wars with many people he doesn't want to make enemies.

(5) Potential voters might be discouraged from voting as the comment-section seems like a mess, and because many people are getting rebuked for their votes.

But it could...

(1) Produce votes with better quality.

(2) Correct some possible mistakes in RFDs.

(3) Discourage debaters from biased voting, or small RFDs that don't provide enough clarifications.

What do you think?
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:45:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

I wonder why.
"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
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:46:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:45:09 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

I wonder why.

Not just because of that debate. Also because of my Abraham & Isaac debate.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Subutai
Posts: 3,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Subutai
Posts: 3,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:50:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

You make a good point, but what's so wrong with using the comments?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:53:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:50:00 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

You make a good point, but what's so wrong with using the comments?

Using PM quarantines drama so as not to spread and infect innocent voters.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 2:56:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:53:41 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:50:00 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

You make a good point, but what's so wrong with using the comments?

Using PM quarantines drama so as not to spread and infect innocent voters.

Using the word "infect" implies and assumes that a criticism of the vote will be a negative thing.

Another way of looking at things is that a constructive criticism of a vote in the comments is public and will therefore keep others from making the same mistake as the original voter.
"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
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 3:00:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:56:04 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:53:41 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:50:00 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

You make a good point, but what's so wrong with using the comments?

Using PM quarantines drama so as not to spread and infect innocent voters.

Using the word "infect" implies and assumes that a criticism of the vote will be a negative thing.

Another way of looking at things is that a constructive criticism of a vote in the comments is public and will therefore keep others from making the same mistake as the original voter.

From my experience it seems that the negatives outweigh the benefits, though.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 3:08:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

The only problem with that is that the default is for PMs to be between friends only. Not everyone is friends, so it's often easier to conduct discussion in the comments.
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 3:55:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

I strongly disagree. If a voter only skims over an argument, or misunderstands it, then the debater should not be screwed over due to the voters incompetence. The voter retains the right to challenge.

However, there does reach a point where the challenges can just become harassing. A debater can challenge the RFD, maybe talk with the voter over the length of a few points, but if the voter is going to change position, the debater should drop the issue.

But, I do think the debater retains a right to challenge.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Subutai
Posts: 3,177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 4:25:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:53:41 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:50:00 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:49:20 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:48:12 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 1/3/2014 2:41:39 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
I think arguing RFDs should be prohibited in the comment section.

Why? I think that a rational objective criticism of someone's vote is not necessarily a bad thing. If the voter either clearly missed something, did not read the whole debate, voted mostly on prior belief, or some other factor that degraded the quality of said vote, I think either debater has the right to respectfully challenge such a vote.

That could be done through PM.

You make a good point, but what's so wrong with using the comments?

Using PM quarantines drama so as not to spread and infect innocent voters.

But you're implying that objective criticism is then bad, which it isn't. Posting such criticisms in the comments could aid later voters into not making the same mistakes. Further, not everyone has their messages open, and the comments may be the only way to voice your criticism.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 5:58:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 2:26:11 PM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
Vote-bullying or vote-correcting? That is the question.

If someone responds to an RFD by offering rebuttals and asking for clarifications while in the voting period, what would you call that?

It depends. I don't think a voter has a blank check when it comes to voting. A voter might get asked to clarify something in their RFD..........oh the humanity !!!!!!!

Yes I understand the concern that this is open to abuse by a debater who seeks to change a vote, but I think it's less open to abuse than a voting system where people can give how many points to whoever they want for any reason they want and know they will not be called to account on it.

For some people voting isn't really about voting on the debate, they see it as a chance to express their own views on the subject and/or the person they like.

Take that sh*t to the opinion section.........

The DDO elite..............which doesn't exist................has spoken.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Bullish
Posts: 3,527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 7:46:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ultimately, the debater has next to no leverage over the voter, unless the voter chooses to be personally offended at whatever the debater said. So this is a non-issue.

Attempting to limit communication between debater and voter would be futile. Voters cannot and are not held at the same standard as real life debate judges.

IMO, trying to change a voters vote is not good etiquette, no matter where, unless both debaters agree that something is wrong. If the voter has made a mistake, that's his mistake to make. If the mistake is so blatantly obvious, then one should appeal to higher authority and use the report button.
0x5f3759df
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:42:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I would like to point out that in real-life debate tournaments participants have the option of challenging the decisions of their judges.
"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
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:43:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:42:59 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
I would like to point out that in real-life debate tournaments participants have the option of challenging the decisions of their judges.

^fact
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 8:48:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Something that could be very interesting would be the ability to submit votes to an elected board of DDO-ers who can decide whether or not they should be removed.
"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
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:13:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:48:32 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
Something that could be very interesting would be the ability to submit votes to an elected board of DDO-ers who can decide whether or not they should be removed.

Roy
Ragnar
wirchiririchiww (sue me if I don't know how to spell it)
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:16:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 9:13:39 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 1/3/2014 8:48:32 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
Something that could be very interesting would be the ability to submit votes to an elected board of DDO-ers who can decide whether or not they should be removed.

Roy
Ragnar
wirchiririchiww (sue me if I don't know how to spell it)

Yes, that would be a good core group.
"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
TUF
Posts: 21,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2014 9:46:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/3/2014 8:48:32 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
Something that could be very interesting would be the ability to submit votes to an elected board of DDO-ers who can decide whether or not they should be removed.

Funny you say that. There was one, and there was some pretty big drama over it.

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

Quality votes are a very subjective thing, and the board complicated things a bit. Not to say that this couldn't work with better management, but it has been tried. It actually wasn't elected, though that was one of my own suggestions for it.

At 10/27/2013 7:36:29 AM, TUF wrote:
The first I can see would be the perception of Airmax's "inner circle" as Imabench worded it. I think the perception around the idea that the president of the site choosing who gets a say in something so important creates a little bit of hostility among members. This is not to say that those chosen in any way do not have fair judgement, or possess intellect enough to make qualified decisions. The perception itself though is harmful for several reasons. Many individuals may think those chosen are not qualified, for whatever reasons. I think the most fair way to resolve such an issue, would be to allow members of the community elect interested individuals, as they did with their own president. Under normal circumstances, this might seem a little bit more work than necessary, but it IS a possible solution to negate such negative feelings from a democracy standpoint.

I think re-instating this with modifications could be a good idea, though I would want to be pretty careful with it to avoid situations like the last one.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 12:02:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yeah, the debate part is for the debate, and should live inside its own little world. To keep that area "clean," we also have a comments section to cover other things, continue the discussion, and include other people who aren't going to vote but would still like to join in. So that is what it's there for.

Most voters won't change thier votes, anyway - and it makes you look bad to ask. I talk to people about my debates there, but I don't think anyone has ever changed their votes in any way that has helped me. Mostly, they are just still telling me why I'm wrong, and I am returning the favor.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 12:11:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I think the idea of an elected panel of judges is a good idea, but they can't be all on the same ideological side. We would need a "for sure" moderate, liberal and a conservative... and most people would really have to love the moderate, because that sister would make all the important decisions if ideology was an issue.

I think a better way to do it might be informally... like have a group of volunteers that have skills that specific voters respect to weigh in as an arbiter.

So, for example, if Zaradi says I screwed up, I am more or less sure that I probably did. Or Stephen Hawkins, or even Imabench. So, if guys like this were game, I could ask one or all of them to review a specific vote because I pretty much trust them all the time.

I mean, we could do something like that right now, without having to ask permission or anything... it just wouldn't be a system that could actually REMOVE bad votes unless that decision was reviewed by TUF. (Or the MODS)

But, even though it hasn't worked in the past, we might be able to pull it off now if we are all on the same page with it.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 12:35:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ok. I want to go on the record as formally backing the idea of a more or less elected review panel of SOME kind. I also like the idea of us individually feeling safe asking for another debater that we respect to review questionable votes. (This could turn into factions, so there's that. I think TUF will see through a lot of the BS, but I don't know how to fix that.)

I also think something as simple as a thread that asks members en-masse to take a look at specific votes might work. If it gets actually used... Since I am trying to pay careful attention to my voting, I will put myself up on the block first, and see if I am doing a good job or not. If people tell me I'm not being fair to someone in my voting, I will change my vote - 100% promise.
OtakuJordan
Posts: 280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 1:17:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 12:35:41 PM, Beverlee wrote:
Ok. I want to go on the record as formally backing the idea of a more or less elected review panel of SOME kind. I also like the idea of us individually feeling safe asking for another debater that we respect to review questionable votes. (This could turn into factions, so there's that. I think TUF will see through a lot of the BS, but I don't know how to fix that.)

I also think something as simple as a thread that asks members en-masse to take a look at specific votes might work. If it gets actually used... Since I am trying to pay careful attention to my voting, I will put myself up on the block first, and see if I am doing a good job or not. If people tell me I'm not being fair to someone in my voting, I will change my vote - 100% promise.

I think that would turn into arguments and flame wars far too often. If we elected some users it would give them an air of authority and their decisions would have some finality. If it's open to all users then it will just result in disputes like the recent thread spawned by the debate between you and Garrett.
"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
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 2:13:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 1:17:35 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
At 1/4/2014 12:35:41 PM, Beverlee wrote:
Ok. I want to go on the record as formally backing the idea of a more or less elected review panel of SOME kind. I also like the idea of us individually feeling safe asking for another debater that we respect to review questionable votes. (This could turn into factions, so there's that. I think TUF will see through a lot of the BS, but I don't know how to fix that.)

I also think something as simple as a thread that asks members en-masse to take a look at specific votes might work. If it gets actually used... Since I am trying to pay careful attention to my voting, I will put myself up on the block first, and see if I am doing a good job or not. If people tell me I'm not being fair to someone in my voting, I will change my vote - 100% promise.

I think that would turn into arguments and flame wars far too often. If we elected some users it would give them an air of authority and their decisions would have some finality. If it's open to all users then it will just result in disputes like the recent thread spawned by the debate between you and Garrett.

Yeah that sucked.

And you might be right about the thread just not being useful. We can find out, because I put one of my own votes up to see if it was justified. It'll be an experiment. I also really like the idea of a panel - I would like just voting for the panel members by itself. This would show how much people appreciate it when voters are as careful as they can be.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 2:51:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/4/2014 2:13:33 PM, Beverlee wrote:
At 1/4/2014 1:17:35 PM, OtakuJordan wrote:
At 1/4/2014 12:35:41 PM, Beverlee wrote:
Ok. I want to go on the record as formally backing the idea of a more or less elected review panel of SOME kind. I also like the idea of us individually feeling safe asking for another debater that we respect to review questionable votes. (This could turn into factions, so there's that. I think TUF will see through a lot of the BS, but I don't know how to fix that.)

I also think something as simple as a thread that asks members en-masse to take a look at specific votes might work. If it gets actually used... Since I am trying to pay careful attention to my voting, I will put myself up on the block first, and see if I am doing a good job or not. If people tell me I'm not being fair to someone in my voting, I will change my vote - 100% promise.

I think that would turn into arguments and flame wars far too often. If we elected some users it would give them an air of authority and their decisions would have some finality. If it's open to all users then it will just result in disputes like the recent thread spawned by the debate between you and Garrett.

Yeah that sucked.

And you might be right about the thread just not being useful. We can find out, because I put one of my own votes up to see if it was justified. It'll be an experiment. I also really like the idea of a panel - I would like just voting for the panel members by itself. This would show how much people appreciate it when voters are as careful as they can be.

I'm in favor or doing another vote panel in whatever way members feel would work best, with a couple caveats.

The biggest one is that I don't want members to be publicly called out for bad votes in an official capacity. So I'm completely against a "bad vote" thread, or whatever that would be called or entail.

The previous panel worked quite well, but obviously wasn't perfect. Voting moderation is a very important aspect that can fix a lot of issues with the site and it's one of the things I mentioned to TUF after he was elected. I'm sure it's something he has given a lot of thought to, and I'm certain in the near future he'll offer the ideas he's come up with for how we can work out a reasonable method for dealing with voting.

If that is a vote panel, that works for me... if that's something else, we can do whatever he and others feel is best.

Currently, I remove objectively bad votes and that is all. In the case of grey areas I often contact members asking them to expand on their vote. Otherwise I leave it alone.

The general rule is, "Explain every point you award". If a member does that I don't look twice at their vote, even if it can be argued that it isn't a good vote. I simply don't want to unilaterally make any such decisions in cases that aren't objectively obvious.

So as I said, I'm sure TUF is working on some suggestions to offer me, and he and I, along with any other members willing, can work out something in the long term that will work best in this area.
Debate.org Moderator
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/4/2014 3:23:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It really depends.

When I vote, I don't like debaters challenging the vote because I put time and effort into it and the debater's perspective is so obviously biased that I don't believe them when they tell me I am wrong.

When I debate and someone votes against me for poor reasons, I generally call out the voter on his bad reasons and consider it to be a bad vote if not an outright votebomb so I certainly call them out on it.

It is hypocritical and at our core, I think most people are hypocritical. There is no real solution to this problem. The correct position is the position you agree with. When everyone (or at least most people) are hypocritical, it causes conflict because most people at one time or another tend to be on both sides of the issue.

So, is the solution not to be hypocritical? I don't know. I still feel some votes against me were bad while most votes I cast were good so there is no way to eliminate the hypocrisy. We just have to live with it.