Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

What not to do when voting.

donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2014 7:04:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

Yes. I've noticed this happens. Someone casts a vote and says "Pro's arguments were fallacious because blah blah blah."
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2014 7:07:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/20/2014 7:04:57 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

Yes. I've noticed this happens. Someone casts a vote and says "Pro's arguments were fallacious because blah blah blah."

I wasn't gonna bring up the debate... But after the last few comments the guy made, here is the debate that made me make this thread. http://www.debate.org...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,743
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/20/2014 7:10:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is very true.
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2014 9:27:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. ...

Yes, this often happens and is often clearly wrong. 90% of the time it's obvious, but there are a couple of borderline cases.

First, the proponent must make a prima facie case, which is to say that the case must be able to stand on it's merits before an opponent tries to defeat it. For example, suppose the case is "X is true. It just is, and everyone knows it." That's not prima facie because there are no established facts and no logic supporting it. It's up to the voter to figure that out.

Another situation is when the debater says, "X is true, and experts overwhelmingly agree it is true. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]" The opponent doesn't bother to look up the references and just argues why it is not true. You look at the references and discover they are really not supporting the contention. So are you introducing an external argument that the sources are bogus, or are you merely evaluating the quality of the sources as being valid references for the claim? The source point is lost, but what of the dependent argument? I'm inclined to think the argument fails as well, on the grounds that sources are part of the debate and integral to the argument. But it's borderline at best.

Yet another case is clash of one debater saying "X is true, and Y is not true." while the other says "Y is true, and X is not true." You happen to know that neither X nor Y is true and can identify why each has failed. In other words, the debate is a total screwup, a fairly common situation for noobs in over their heads. But the debaters deserve a vote on the debate because they are trying hard. I think the best that can be done is to explain why both are wrong and vote on the basis of the BoP not being met. The alternative is to try to pick the better quality false argument, and there are no good standards for that.
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2014 1:45:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Something I used to try to do was include good points made both sides...

When bias is too strong against one side, there is such a thing as a null vote.
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...
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2014 1:58:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

Yes, but unfortunately most people don't even read (or understand) the fvcking debate before they vote. Thats your real obstacle to overcome.
Juan_Pablo
Posts: 2,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/21/2014 2:21:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/21/2014 9:27:00 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. ...

Yes, this often happens and is often clearly wrong. 90% of the time it's obvious, but there are a couple of borderline cases.

First, the proponent must make a prima facie case, which is to say that the case must be able to stand on it's merits before an opponent tries to defeat it. For example, suppose the case is "X is true. It just is, and everyone knows it." That's not prima facie because there are no established facts and no logic supporting it. It's up to the voter to figure that out.

Another situation is when the debater says, "X is true, and experts overwhelmingly agree it is true. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]" The opponent doesn't bother to look up the references and just argues why it is not true. You look at the references and discover they are really not supporting the contention. So are you introducing an external argument that the sources are bogus, or are you merely evaluating the quality of the sources as being valid references for the claim? The source point is lost, but what of the dependent argument? I'm inclined to think the argument fails as well, on the grounds that sources are part of the debate and integral to the argument. But it's borderline at best.

Yet another case is clash of one debater saying "X is true, and Y is not true." while the other says "Y is true, and X is not true." You happen to know that neither X nor Y is true and can identify why each has failed. In other words, the debate is a total screwup, a fairly common situation for noobs in over their heads. But the debaters deserve a vote on the debate because they are trying hard. I think the best that can be done is to explain why both are wrong and vote on the basis of the BoP not being met. The alternative is to try to pick the better quality false argument, and there are no good standards for that.

Excellent points, Roy. I agree with all of these.

When a false argument is presented and it's evident in the logic the debater uses, and this particular argument carries quite a bit of weight in establishing the validity of the debater's other arguments in this same debate, the best the voter can do is explain why he's voting a certain way if he's taking away points from this debater.

As you say, there is no good standard for doing this, so the voter needs to select which arguments are more coherent and better presented and explain his vote when he finally gets to it.

Not everyone is going to be satisfied, but I take it that clarity of an argument and its logical coherence are part of what's being evaluated when a voter assigns points for "Who made more convincing arguments".

Whatever the results, it's a learning experience for everyone.
Juan_Pablo
Posts: 2,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 4:40:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
This is to donald.keller:

I want to apologize for coming off too strong in my criticism of one of your arguments in the debate on global warming. My attitude was too harsh and that's why I believe you blew up, as did tylergraham.

For my attitude I do apologize. ( I've also amended my analysis in the voting section, so as to come off less harsh. )
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 2:02:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

I agree with you in part about the conversations. However, so far that's the only way I know of of getting rid of ban votes. There's no other appeal method if there is an RFD (reason for decision), no matter how silly it is. It might be necessary to contact those voters to ask them to review their vote.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 2:04:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/22/2014 2:02:44 PM, kbub wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

I agree with you in part about the conversations. However, so far that's the only way I know of of getting rid of ban votes. There's no other appeal method if there is an RFD (reason for decision), no matter how silly it is. It might be necessary to contact those voters to ask them to review their vote.

Asking them to review their vote is the most ineffective thing you can do. Also, the three things I listed were copy/pasted from the Site Rules.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 2:06:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/22/2014 2:04:10 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 2/22/2014 2:02:44 PM, kbub wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

I agree with you in part about the conversations. However, so far that's the only way I know of of getting rid of ban votes. There's no other appeal method if there is an RFD (reason for decision), no matter how silly it is. It might be necessary to contact those voters to ask them to review their vote.

Asking them to review their vote is the most ineffective thing you can do. Also, the three things I listed were copy/pasted from the Site Rules.

You're probably right about that. That probably wouldn't work well at all. I guess what I'm talking about it not changing votes based on a conversation but changing votes based on a request to revisit those votes. But you're right, I can't picture that working well. I wish there was an appeals method.
Mikal
Posts: 11,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 2:09:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/22/2014 2:06:44 PM, kbub wrote:
At 2/22/2014 2:04:10 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 2/22/2014 2:02:44 PM, kbub wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section. Voting is based on points made in the debate, not your own personal points. For one, how would the opponent you voted against be able to refute the argument you made? It's like voting on new arguments made in the last round of the debate. You could challenge them in the comments, but it's not like you are going to change his vote

You can disagree with the persons points, but if the opponent didn't successfully challenge them, you have to vote honestly.

"Remember, the basis for decision should NOT include:

Opinions held you, but not mentioned by the debaters.
Conversation with any persons during or after the debate round.
Comments made by other members of the site.
"

The admin need to enforce the rule more. It's a cheap way to wrongly vote for who you agree with, instead of who won the debate.

I agree with you in part about the conversations. However, so far that's the only way I know of of getting rid of ban votes. There's no other appeal method if there is an RFD (reason for decision), no matter how silly it is. It might be necessary to contact those voters to ask them to review their vote.

Asking them to review their vote is the most ineffective thing you can do. Also, the three things I listed were copy/pasted from the Site Rules.

You're probably right about that. That probably wouldn't work well at all. I guess what I'm talking about it not changing votes based on a conversation but changing votes based on a request to revisit those votes. But you're right, I can't picture that working well. I wish there was an appeals method.

Reporting is as much of an appeal as you will get which is pretty fair. There is nothing you can do to stop people from being bias, if they give an RFD that is substantial or even not in some cases it is valid. It is their opinion , as much as it sucks they can just change their RFD to fit whom they want to win. There is a wall that DDO can not break down with this, nor do I think it is possible to break down.
ADreamOfLiberty
Posts: 1,570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/22/2014 2:26:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/21/2014 9:27:00 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
At 2/20/2014 6:08:05 PM, donald.keller wrote:
This is too common, and needs to be taken more serious. Voting based on arguments you made up after the debate.

When voting, you base your vote on how the debaters did. If people could vote based on their OWN arguments, it'd be the Opinion section.

Yet another case is clash of one debater saying "X is true, and Y is not true." while the other says "Y is true, and X is not true." You happen to know that neither X nor Y is true and can identify why each has failed. In other words, the debate is a total screwup, a fairly common situation for noobs in over their heads. But the debaters deserve a vote on the debate because they are trying hard. I think the best that can be done is to explain why both are wrong and vote on the basis of the BoP not being met. The alternative is to try to pick the better quality false argument, and there are no good standards for that.

What you happen to know is your opinion is it not? So what matters is which argument better supported X is true or Y is true. If both failed then you should vote tie.
LOL, yeah, it's pretty amazing how they think they can "reason" with you. - Sidewalker, speaking of advocates for sexual deviancy.

So, my advice, Liberty, is to go somewhere else. Leave, and never come back. - YYW

And that's what I did. Contact me at http://www.edeb8.com... by the same user name if you have anything you'd like to say.