Total Posts:20|Showing Posts:1-20
Jump to topic:

Massive VoteBombing problem

progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2014 8:41:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Debate.org should have a setting where both members of a debate can agree beforehand to limit voting to only those above a certain ELO. That would weed out the trolls BIGTIME.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
Subutai
Posts: 3,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/1/2014 8:45:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/1/2014 8:41:24 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Debate.org should have a setting where both members of a debate can agree beforehand to limit voting to only those above a certain ELO. That would weed out the trolls BIGTIME.

That is using a blunt instrument where a more precise solution is needed. You're assuming that everyone below a certain ELO is a bad voter. By that measure, you shouldn't be able to vote. Or you could set the limit so high at only RoyLatham could vote, which is stupid.
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
3/1/2014 8:50:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/1/2014 8:45:26 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 3/1/2014 8:41:24 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
Debate.org should have a setting where both members of a debate can agree beforehand to limit voting to only those above a certain ELO. That would weed out the trolls BIGTIME.

That is using a blunt instrument where a more precise solution is needed. You're assuming that everyone below a certain ELO is a bad voter. By that measure, you shouldn't be able to vote.

xD good point lmao.

Or you could set the limit so high at only RoyLatham could vote, which is stupid.

Yea but nobody would agree to that, because then they would be sealing their own fate before the debate even started.

Like others have said before, voters should get voted. So you could set a debate to be voted on only by voters of a certain reputation.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:18:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

First, you can't really say it was "at my own game." Second, the objective of the debate was to make me angry by virtue of a video -- not by virtue of votebombing.
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:20:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

Did you even read the thread? You're extremely misinformed about what it is I'm "crying" about.

I'm not crying about losing a debate -- I did not lose the debate. I'm crying about stupid 7-point votebombs that were without reason. The last voter-- whom I reported -- even admitted to votebombing. If your argument, honestly, is that being upset about votebombing -- which is outside the parameters of the debate (and airmax has confirmed this) -- then you're simply wrong.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:20:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:18:14 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

First, you can't really say it was "at my own game." Second, the objective of the debate was to make me angry by virtue of a video -- not by virtue of votebombing.

I haven't viewed the debate but just one question Did you make any rebuttals other than "AND"
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.
My work here is, finally, done.
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:38:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:20:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:18:14 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

First, you can't really say it was "at my own game." Second, the objective of the debate was to make me angry by virtue of a video -- not by virtue of votebombing.

I haven't viewed the debate but just one question Did you make any rebuttals other than "AND"

Other than "AND?" That makes absolutely no sense.

I said all that I could say in a 5-minute, 500 character debate. Perhaps you should view the debate.

Oh, that's right, you did, and you came to the conclusion that pointing out that the scene was "bloody" -- even though both actors were literally covered in (fake) blood, making this statement true -- was a sign of getting angry. Nice critical thinking skills, by the way.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:38:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.

I viewed the debate and I would have voted against you as you described it as "Quite bloody" Why did you make any rebuttal at all? Why would you make such a comment if were not unsettling?
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:41:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:38:53 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.

I viewed the debate and I would have voted against you as you described it as "Quite bloody" Why did you make any rebuttal at all? Why would you make such a comment if were not unsettling?

I already responded to your comment on the debate, but I'll do it again.

First, "quite bloody" is a statement of fact. The definition of "bloody" from Merriam-Webster is "stained with blood." The actors were stained with blood.

What would I be rebuting? He said that he could make me mad, and I said he did not and could not because the video was fake -- I even said I wanted to see more. The burden of proof, by virtue of a positive statement, was on Pro.

And feel free to vote against me. I'll simply report it, as I have done to every other stupid vote.
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:44:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:38:53 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.

I viewed the debate and I would have voted against you as you described it as "Quite bloody" Why did you make any rebuttal at all? Why would you make such a comment if were not unsettling?

I misread this, so let me comment on "Why did you make any rebuttal at all?":

Simply because I had 500 characters and wanted to provide my reasoning to disprove his point. That was hardly a rebuttal, also. Even saying "you did not make me mad," by your standards, is a rebuttal, and that would have been required to win the debate.
Krazzy_Player
Posts: 552
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:08:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:44:51 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:38:53 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.

I viewed the debate and I would have voted against you as you described it as "Quite bloody" Why did you make any rebuttal at all? Why would you make such a comment if were not unsettling?

I misread this, so let me comment on "Why did you make any rebuttal at all?":

Simply because I had 500 characters and wanted to provide my reasoning to disprove his point. That was hardly a rebuttal, also. Even saying "you did not make me mad," by your standards, is a rebuttal, and that would have been required to win the debate.
Reasons for my vote bomb
1. The resolution was I bet I can make you mad but he made it clear in the first round that he cannot make you mad and you followed this.
2. He had a source i.e video and you didn't.
3. Conduct and S & G, was of my choice as I found the debate unique and decided to vote in favor of instigator.
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:11:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 10:08:23 AM, Krazzy_Player wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:44:51 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:38:53 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:13:38 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:09:25 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:52:02 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:51:24 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:50:10 AM, progressivedem22 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 8:46:51 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 3/1/2014 7:27:48 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

The votes say it all, really.

The debate was on whether my opponent could make me mad with his video -- he asserted that he could, and thus had the burden of proof. I could post that I wasn't mad -- as I did -- but obviously it's impossible to know whether I truly was. Therefore, he cannot fulfill his burden of proof.

However, this guy decided that he was going to take this a step further by asking his friends to votebomb the debate. Suddenly, 7 point votes were coming in against me. Airmax cleaned the problem up, only for it to continue. Because I called this person a troll in the comment section -- and, mind you, this is not only true if he in fact asked his friends to vote for him (which he has not denied), but this section itself is outside the parameters of the debate -- they are claiming that he in fact won the debate. To my understanding, that is contrary to site rules.

I'd say your opponent has been successful. Here you are, ranting away about a debate that you said would not upset you.

The debate itself did not upset me. If he intended to upset me by asking his friends to violate DDO rules, then sure, he's been successful. That's a pretty dumb reason to vote for him, though. In spite of that, a number of people have done it. Maybe instead of ELO requirements, we should have IQ requirements...

He beat you at your own game

At my own game? I'd love if you could elaborate.

Are you or are you not upset. You can say it isn't because of the video until the cows come home.

Perception is everything. Crying about losing a debate that you said would not upset you is a pretty powerful perception to dismiss.

But, votes aren't part of the debate.
Unless you think that after a "normal" debate ends, con and pro (and others) arguing in the comments further or voters present arguments/advice that demolishes the "winning" side should be taken into consideration when voting.
The votes are to be decided by what occurs in the debate, not after, regardless of the debate's resolution.

I viewed the debate and I would have voted against you as you described it as "Quite bloody" Why did you make any rebuttal at all? Why would you make such a comment if were not unsettling?

I misread this, so let me comment on "Why did you make any rebuttal at all?":

Simply because I had 500 characters and wanted to provide my reasoning to disprove his point. That was hardly a rebuttal, also. Even saying "you did not make me mad," by your standards, is a rebuttal, and that would have been required to win the debate.
Reasons for my vote bomb
1. The resolution was I bet I can make you mad but he made it clear in the first round that he cannot make you mad and you followed this.
2. He had a source i.e video and you didn't.
3. Conduct and S & G, was of my choice as I found the debate unique and decided to vote in favor of instigator.

This should be fun:

1. He "made clear that he couldn't?" That's simply not true. He said that, to play the game he said up, I must believe that he cannot.
2. This is absolutely ridiculous. The debate was predicated on his original video. That is literally the equivalent of defining a term before having a debate on it. There was no need for sources at all -- the debate was 500 characters, 5 minutes per round.
3. So basically, conduct and S&G had no basis independent of your own arbitrary whim.

As I said, I reported your votebomb. You may not want to use the word "votebomb" in future votes. It tends to give away your motives.