Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

This type of vote is not allowed

GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2014 11:52:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

@Garret - I resent this very public objection to my vote. If you have any problem with any of my votes, please PM me and I'd be happy to explain or clarify. The comments section is also a great place to have this discussion--not the forums. Only if you are unsatisfied with my response, should you do something like this in this venue, IMHO.

I have noticed that you tend to create very public objections to voters whose votes you dislike. This trend is unsettling, though I don't think you mean anything by it.

Regardless, I am willing to explain my RFD.

The resolution was "Evolution is Not Proven." I felt that this resolution in itself was flawed. A theory, like Evolution, is by its very nature conjectural, and, consequently, cannot be "proven," only supported. Therefore, I felt that the resolution was inherently unfair from the get-go.

Typically, when people accept debates like this, they understand that these resolutions are asking an "on balance" question--i.e. that evolution is, on balance, not proven. This is a typical, underlying assumption whereby debaters grant that whoever's side is weightier is the victor. Pro instead, by my judgment, chose a very literal interpretation of the resolution, which was abusive. This is evidenced by his emphasis on irrefutable "proof" in the final round.

Ultimately, I felt that this skewed the ground so unfairly towards Pro, that I had no choice but to not evaluate the arguments. Doing so, by my judgment, would have been unfair. This is why I abstained from assigning argument points.

Those points I did assign were based on sources, and were justified in my RFD. Yes, there is no way Con could have won, yet, he did have better sources. He deserves those points.

If anyone has a further concern, I'd be happy to address it.
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...
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Theories are not proven or provable, and evolution is a theory. Theories explain evidence, they are not statements of fact. The BOP is unbalanced, because there is no way that CON could conceivably win this debate -unless the judges are dimwitted mouth breathers.
Tsar of DDO
imabench
Posts: 21,230
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.
Tsar of DDO
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.
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...
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:04:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is one of those types of votes that regardless of being reported, I wont touch. In contrast to the removed vote mentioned in the OP, which shows great sportsmanship on the part of the OP because it did go in his favor, this vote has the minimum qualifications to avoid being deleted. That is, it explains all of the points it awards. (the other vote was 4 points with an RFD of essentially "Pro/Con had better arguments" - and it didn't explain the conduct point, so it was deleted.)

That said, I don't exactly like these public call out threads and think the OP should have contacted the voter in questions or gone about this in a different way. While I do question the wisdom of the vote because it awards points for sources yet doesn't describe how this effects the debate as a whole, or whether it actually does (which should be the metric for sources) it does fall within the basic standards for a proper vote.

While the OP is welcome to challenge the vote and request a change, I wont be stepping in here to do anything about the vote aside from saying what I did above.
Debate.org Moderator
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:05:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.

I didn't see how you awarded points, but your RFD was not in error based on the resolution.
Tsar of DDO
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:06:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

No, that is completely allowed in my book. Bsh1 provided a reasonable RFD. No need to be so public.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:08:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

There is nothing wrong with Bsh1's vote. This thread, however, is misplaced.
Tsar of DDO
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:
Theories are not proven or provable, and evolution is a theory.

NO. I made it VERY clear in BOLD letter in the FIRST ROUND how Evolution was defined. Allow me to quote the VERY FIRST sentence of the VERY FIRST round BEFORE my opponent accepted:

"Evolution" is defined, for the purposes of this debate, as "the idea that all extant life descended from a common organism via mutations and Natural Selection."

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

No, the only problem is the fact that I was punished because the voter thought that Con took on an unfair position. Which is 100% BS. You can't give the underdog points solely because he's the underdog, but bsh1 did worse than that. He explicitly admitted that it was impossible for Con to win, yet still gave him points! And me none! BS!

At 1/25/2014 11:52:58 PM, bsh1 wrote:

@Garret - blah blah blah, I'm not letting those creationists win and Evolution is undebateable, and I know this is a blatant vote-bomb and I'm going to admit it in my RFD and vote-bomb anyways

My opponent exercised his freedom in accepting the debate. I made it VERY CLEAR IN BOLD WORDS IN THE FIRST ROUND how Evolution would be defined. I did this intentionally to avoid the type of B.S. excuses that you did (Evolution is a theory blah blah) and yet, you disregard the terms of the debate and vote-bomb anyways.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:10:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:04:39 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
This is one of those types of votes that regardless of being reported, I wont touch. In contrast to the removed vote mentioned in the OP, which shows great sportsmanship on the part of the OP because it did go in his favor, this vote has the minimum qualifications to avoid being deleted. That is, it explains all of the points it awards. (the other vote was 4 points with an RFD of essentially "Pro/Con had better arguments" - and it didn't explain the conduct point, so it was deleted.)

I have amended my vote. Garret makes a valid point when he asserts that Con accepted the debate, so the onus is on the accepter, not the instigator. At the same time, I feel as if the topic is unfair, and so I simply chose to not award any points.

That said, I don't exactly like these public call out threads and think the OP should have contacted the voter in questions or gone about this in a different way.

I entirely concur.

While I do question the wisdom of the vote because it awards points for sources yet doesn't describe how this effects the debate as a whole, or whether it actually does (which should be the metric for sources) it does fall within the basic standards for a proper vote.

I think accessibility of sources is vital insofar as it shows a source has not be falsified, misquoted, or misrepresented. While I am certainly not saying that Garret did these things, we must also consider that, without the source itself to examine, it is hard for his opponent to evaluate and critique the source within the debate. I have grown to believe that links are the only fair way to display sources, and I used that metric when awarding those points.

While the OP is welcome to challenge the vote and request a change, I wont be stepping in here to do anything about the vote aside from saying what I did above.

I welcome the discourse. Voters have an obligation to justify their votes, and debaters have a right to challenge the voters. In this case, I did change my vote.
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...
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:11:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:
Theories are not proven or provable, and evolution is a theory.

NO. I made it VERY clear in BOLD letter in the FIRST ROUND how Evolution was defined. Allow me to quote the VERY FIRST sentence of the VERY FIRST round BEFORE my opponent accepted:

You don't get to define words at your convenience. They have real meaning, beyond what you call them in a debate. That is the essential problem, here.
Tsar of DDO
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:13:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:05:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.

I didn't see how you awarded points, but your RFD was not in error based on the resolution.

I agree. But I can also see a case for Garret's POV in that Con did, foolishly, accept the debate. Rather than stir up needless animus, a null vote is preferable.
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...
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:13:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:13:01 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:05:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.

I didn't see how you awarded points, but your RFD was not in error based on the resolution.

I agree. But I can also see a case for Garret's POV in that Con did, foolishly, accept the debate. Rather than stir up needless animus, a null vote is preferable.

If that's what you want to do, that's fine -but the fact that CON accepted a biased debate doesn't make the BOP any less abusive.
Tsar of DDO
airmax1227
Posts: 13,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:15:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:10:28 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:04:39 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
This is one of those types of votes that regardless of being reported, I wont touch. In contrast to the removed vote mentioned in the OP, which shows great sportsmanship on the part of the OP because it did go in his favor, this vote has the minimum qualifications to avoid being deleted. That is, it explains all of the points it awards. (the other vote was 4 points with an RFD of essentially "Pro/Con had better arguments" - and it didn't explain the conduct point, so it was deleted.)

I have amended my vote. Garret makes a valid point when he asserts that Con accepted the debate, so the onus is on the accepter, not the instigator. At the same time, I feel as if the topic is unfair, and so I simply chose to not award any points.

I appreciate that and I believe it resolves the issue.

That said, I don't exactly like these public call out threads and think the OP should have contacted the voter in questions or gone about this in a different way.

I entirely concur.

While I do question the wisdom of the vote because it awards points for sources yet doesn't describe how this effects the debate as a whole, or whether it actually does (which should be the metric for sources) it does fall within the basic standards for a proper vote.

I think accessibility of sources is vital insofar as it shows a source has not be falsified, misquoted, or misrepresented. While I am certainly not saying that Garret did these things, we must also consider that, without the source itself to examine, it is hard for his opponent to evaluate and critique the source within the debate. I have grown to believe that links are the only fair way to display sources, and I used that metric when awarding those points.

I think that's fair and as long as some explanation is provided I think that's fine. Again, I would not have deleted your vote. It falls within the expected conduct of voting.

While the OP is welcome to challenge the vote and request a change, I wont be stepping in here to do anything about the vote aside from saying what I did above.

I welcome the discourse. Voters have an obligation to justify their votes, and debaters have a right to challenge the voters. In this case, I did change my vote.

I don't take issue with the discourse and it can certainly be valuable. The OP could have just contacted you and got the same results. My major concern is many "call out" threads leading to flame wars and confusion. It just so happens that reasonable people with the same proper motives were involved here and the issue was resolved fairly.
Debate.org Moderator
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:17:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:13:58 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:13:01 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:05:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.

I didn't see how you awarded points, but your RFD was not in error based on the resolution.

I agree. But I can also see a case for Garret's POV in that Con did, foolishly, accept the debate. Rather than stir up needless animus, a null vote is preferable.

If that's what you want to do, that's fine -but the fact that CON accepted a biased debate doesn't make the BOP any less abusive.

I agree with the bolded passage 100%. I can, however, see how the fact that he accepted *might* mitigate that. Really, I didn't see that much at issue with my original RFD; however, I will grant Pro the benefit of the doubt here.
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...
YYW
Posts: 36,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:18:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:17:18 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:13:58 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:13:01 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:05:44 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:03:33 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:59:40 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:29 PM, imabench wrote:
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Bsh I'm barely qualified as a good voter on here, and even I think that ^ is pretty effed up.....

The only problem with this debate is the fact that someone accepted it.

Agreed. Changes were made to the vote, btw. Upon review, I think my decision to award any points was flawed.

I didn't see how you awarded points, but your RFD was not in error based on the resolution.

I agree. But I can also see a case for Garret's POV in that Con did, foolishly, accept the debate. Rather than stir up needless animus, a null vote is preferable.

If that's what you want to do, that's fine -but the fact that CON accepted a biased debate doesn't make the BOP any less abusive.

I agree with the bolded passage 100%. I can, however, see how the fact that he accepted *might* mitigate that. Really, I didn't see that much at issue with my original RFD; however, I will grant Pro the benefit of the doubt here.

Very diplomatic.
Tsar of DDO
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:20:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:15:34 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:10:28 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:04:39 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
This is one of those types of votes that regardless of being reported, I wont touch. In contrast to the removed vote mentioned in the OP, which shows great sportsmanship on the part of the OP because it did go in his favor, this vote has the minimum qualifications to avoid being deleted. That is, it explains all of the points it awards. (the other vote was 4 points with an RFD of essentially "Pro/Con had better arguments" - and it didn't explain the conduct point, so it was deleted.)

I have amended my vote. Garret makes a valid point when he asserts that Con accepted the debate, so the onus is on the accepter, not the instigator. At the same time, I feel as if the topic is unfair, and so I simply chose to not award any points.

I appreciate that and I believe it resolves the issue.

Agreed.

That said, I don't exactly like these public call out threads and think the OP should have contacted the voter in questions or gone about this in a different way.

I entirely concur.

While I do question the wisdom of the vote because it awards points for sources yet doesn't describe how this effects the debate as a whole, or whether it actually does (which should be the metric for sources) it does fall within the basic standards for a proper vote.

I think accessibility of sources is vital insofar as it shows a source has not be falsified, misquoted, or misrepresented. While I am certainly not saying that Garret did these things, we must also consider that, without the source itself to examine, it is hard for his opponent to evaluate and critique the source within the debate. I have grown to believe that links are the only fair way to display sources, and I used that metric when awarding those points.

I think that's fair and as long as some explanation is provided I think that's fine. Again, I would not have deleted your vote. It falls within the expected conduct of voting.

I did include something to that effect. I will try to be more explicit in future, of course. As voters, we're all learning how to vote better with each ballot.

While the OP is welcome to challenge the vote and request a change, I wont be stepping in here to do anything about the vote aside from saying what I did above.

I welcome the discourse. Voters have an obligation to justify their votes, and debaters have a right to challenge the voters. In this case, I did change my vote.

I don't take issue with the discourse and it can certainly be valuable.

Agreed.

The OP could have just contacted you and got the same results.

EXACTLY.

My major concern is many "call out" threads leading to flame wars and confusion. It just so happens that reasonable people with the same proper motives were involved here and the issue was resolved fairly.

I think this was definitely the case here. Rather that engage in a flame war, I just chose to recognize that there was validity on both sides of the issue, and to just nullify the vote.
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...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:22:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:19:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Thanks to bsh1 for amending his vote. Problem solved.

You're most welcome! I'm happy to vote on your debates, and I am happy to justify or explain ANY RFD I make, but I'd just prefer you PM me or post in the comments instead. Thanks for calling your concerns to my attention--I'm glad I could resolve this before any enmity was generated.
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...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:29:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:

At 1/25/2014 11:52:58 PM, bsh1 wrote:

@Garret - blah blah blah, I'm not letting those creationists win and Evolution is undebateable, and I know this is a blatant vote-bomb and I'm going to admit it in my RFD and vote-bomb anyways

Just saw this. Wow...speechless. I always do everything I can to set my personal feelings aside when judging. I did NOT vote against you because you were a creationist.

This kind of highly personal attack is utterly unacceptable. Saying that you have issues with my vote is one thing. Saying I deliberately cast a biased vote is another--and it crosses a line.

I am happy to review my votes if asked; but asking me to review a vote DOES NOT require that you accuse me of deliberate misconduct.
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...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:32:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:29:30 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:

At 1/25/2014 11:52:58 PM, bsh1 wrote:

@Garret - blah blah blah, I'm not letting those creationists win and Evolution is undebateable, and I know this is a blatant vote-bomb and I'm going to admit it in my RFD and vote-bomb anyways

Just saw this. Wow...speechless. I always do everything I can to set my personal feelings aside when judging.

Well I guess you're a better person than I, because obviously I let my personal feelings slip into that. Sorry.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 12:35:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:32:36 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:29:30 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:

At 1/25/2014 11:52:58 PM, bsh1 wrote:

@Garret - blah blah blah, I'm not letting those creationists win and Evolution is undebateable, and I know this is a blatant vote-bomb and I'm going to admit it in my RFD and vote-bomb anyways

Just saw this. Wow...speechless. I always do everything I can to set my personal feelings aside when judging.

Well I guess you're a better person than I, because obviously I let my personal feelings slip into that. Sorry.

Thanks! Glad this has all been resolved...
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...
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 1:07:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/25/2014 10:58:05 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

According to bsh1:

The resolution itself is flawed. Evolution is a THEORY, and not a fact--this implies that it is still conjecture. I strongly believe that evolution is the BEST explanation, but it is not something that can be objectively proven, at least at this stage. Thus, there is no way Con could have won this debate, because the resolution imposes an abusive BOP. Consequently, I refuse to evaluate arguments. I award sources to Con because I was unable to access Pro's sources. Everything else is tied.

This is total BS. You can't say "there is no way Con could have won" and at the same time give Con points and Pro none. That's just blatant dishonesty.

Also, you can't judge a resolution as flawed in a vote. Con fully knew what he getting into, because it was clear before he accepted the debate. I reported the votebomb that voted for ME and it was removed. This one needs to go too.

Just to be clear, he was entirely right with his RFD. The debate was set up in a way con would lose. Also any vote can be justified with a proper RFD.. You may not agree with it, but that does not mean it is valid. A vote is based on someones perspective, and that can vary from personal opinion or actual material. Welcome to the sight lol.
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 2:00:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 12:11:29 AM, YYW wrote:
At 1/26/2014 12:10:24 AM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/25/2014 11:57:10 PM, YYW wrote:
Theories are not proven or provable, and evolution is a theory.

NO. I made it VERY clear in BOLD letter in the FIRST ROUND how Evolution was defined. Allow me to quote the VERY FIRST sentence of the VERY FIRST round BEFORE my opponent accepted:

You don't get to define words at your convenience. They have real meaning, beyond what you call them in a debate. That is the essential problem, here.

While this is out of context to the discussion, I have heard that same statement in my current debate and slightly disagree. Definitions are as good as the argument behind them. Marriage was before recently stuck on one definition until a group of individuals decided to try and add to that definition to their own convenience.

With that said, I get what the principal of what your saying and why according to this specific situation.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227