Total Posts:67|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Congrats Juggle, An Applause From CP

ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.
Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 1:44:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.



HEAR HEAR! I love edeb8.
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 1:59:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
edeb8 may be my next debating destination, also.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 2:06:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 1:59:09 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
edeb8 may be my next debating destination, also.

I'm getting involved over there, trying to debate, post more, get more people to leave this sinking ship and jump onto a better one.
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 4:22:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
CP,

It is clear you are someone who is really passionate about debating, as is a large number of people on this site. I understand you are incredibly frustrated with both the errors that occurred over the weekend and the perceived direction of the site. I won't enumerate all of your criticisms, as you have already done so in a number of other threads.

I also understand the motivation behind the criticism and the posting of numerous threads. Ultimately, you want a site that provides a good platform for quality, intelligent debating. I get that and very much appreciate that sentiment.

To provide you with some insight - Debate.org is not the only website or area of business that we have to manage. Our resources are limited and sometimes we have to temporarily take our focus off of Debate.org in order to move other areas of the business forward.

This does not mean we do not care about the site, or have abandoned it, it simply means we only have so many hours in the day to address the needs of our business and sometimes sacrifices have to be made. In the start of quarter 2 (which is April) we will have finished up the large initiative that we have been working on for the past few months and will be able to once again devote some attention to improving Debate.org.

I would love to have a constructive dialogue with you to hear your thoughts on what improvements we could make, given your passion for debating and for improving the debating platform. You can outline them here or if you would like, feel free to PM me and I would be happy to discuss.

I am also keenly aware that TUF and some other members are working on a presentation to Juggle as well. We are open to suggestions and will implement improvements based off of member input.

Thanks,
Julia
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 4:38:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 4:22:24 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
CP,

It is clear you are someone who is really passionate about debating, as is a large number of people on this site. I understand you are incredibly frustrated with both the errors that occurred over the weekend and the perceived direction of the site. I won't enumerate all of your criticisms, as you have already done so in a number of other threads.

I also understand the motivation behind the criticism and the posting of numerous threads. Ultimately, you want a site that provides a good platform for quality, intelligent debating. I get that and very much appreciate that sentiment.

To provide you with some insight - Debate.org is not the only website or area of business that we have to manage. Our resources are limited and sometimes we have to temporarily take our focus off of Debate.org in order to move other areas of the business forward.

This does not mean we do not care about the site, or have abandoned it, it simply means we only have so many hours in the day to address the needs of our business and sometimes sacrifices have to be made. In the start of quarter 2 (which is April) we will have finished up the large initiative that we have been working on for the past few months and will be able to once again devote some attention to improving Debate.org.

I would love to have a constructive dialogue with you to hear your thoughts on what improvements we could make, given your passion for debating and for improving the debating platform. You can outline them here or if you would like, feel free to PM me and I would be happy to discuss.

I am also keenly aware that TUF and some other members are working on a presentation to Juggle as well. We are open to suggestions and will implement improvements based off of member input.

Thanks,
Julia

1. Quality control is needed. Most of the content on the internet is garbage. Without quality control you're going to let this seep into your website like you already have. It only takes a tiny bit of low quality stuff to pile up to drown out the higher quality content. You could have a glowing debate about natural rights but it only takes one debate with terrible grammar, forfeits etc to turn readers and voters off completely. If you don't want your site to die an inglorious death, quality control needs to rocket to the top of your priority list.

2. Opinion and Polls sections are basically useless although opinion section more so than polls. Opinion section is a harbor for people who just want to drop their junk and leave without and constructive dialogue. In fact, unless you want to comment there is no room for constructive dialogue. It's people talking past each other which has no place here. I see more where you were going with the Polls sections but due to lack of quality control it does not function at a level even close to high quality. If you want to get people's opinions do it in a debate or the forums, why do we need this useless middle ground?

3. What's the vision for the site? Obviously you guys got your revenue base by letting in the hoards of people from the internet with no real taste for debating. What the message that you have portrayed to us, the users, is that you got what you wanted. The site looks pretty, its full of people clicking to make dumb polls and leaving thus you have achieved some semblance of revenue parity and that's it. Your track record of late has been completely deaf to the desires of the community this site was built around. Are you willing to actually change things in a meaningful way? Or no? Because if not let us know now so we can find elsewhere to go.

These are the biggest things dragging this site down, that and the changes that people have wanted for a long time such as a chat feature, team debates and a better voting system that have gone unheeded. But I would caution against venturing into such projects if you can't even keep the base site running on your server load as is.
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:15:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 4:38:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

1. Quality control is needed. Most of the content on the internet is garbage. Without quality control you're going to let this seep into your website like you already have. It only takes a tiny bit of low quality stuff to pile up to drown out the higher quality content. You could have a glowing debate about natural rights but it only takes one debate with terrible grammar, forfeits etc to turn readers and voters off completely. If you don't want your site to die an inglorious death, quality control needs to rocket to the top of your priority list.

2. Opinion and Polls sections are basically useless although opinion section more so than polls. Opinion section is a harbor for people who just want to drop their junk and leave without and constructive dialogue. In fact, unless you want to comment there is no room for constructive dialogue. It's people talking past each other which has no place here. I see more where you were going with the Polls sections but due to lack of quality control it does not function at a level even close to high quality. If you want to get people's opinions do it in a debate or the forums, why do we need this useless middle ground?

3. What's the vision for the site? Obviously you guys got your revenue base by letting in the hoards of people from the internet with no real taste for debating. What the message that you have portrayed to us, the users, is that you got what you wanted. The site looks pretty, its full of people clicking to make dumb polls and leaving thus you have achieved some semblance of revenue parity and that's it. Your track record of late has been completely deaf to the desires of the community this site was built around. Are you willing to actually change things in a meaningful way? Or no? Because if not let us know now so we can find elsewhere to go.

These are the biggest things dragging this site down, that and the changes that people have wanted for a long time such as a chat feature, team debates and a better voting system that have gone unheeded. But I would caution against venturing into such projects if you can't even keep the base site running on your server load as is.

CP,

Thank you for responding so quickly, I appreciate it.

1) I 100% agree with you. The quality control methods we have in place worked well with a smaller user base, however now that the user base has grown considerably, improvements need to be made. The primary issue that makes moderating difficult is the sheer subjectivity of it. When instances are black and white, it is very easy to weed out problematic content. Enforcing quality that falls in a gray area is much more difficult and something we do need to improve upon. We have been outlining ideas on our end, but again if you or anyone else has input they would like to share, we welcome it.

2) The Opinions section was created to address that contingent of our member base that was in the in-between stages of debating. One of the biggest pieces of feedback we got from new members was that the Debates section was intimidating, so much so that many people did not even attempt to start a debate. The Opinions section was meant to act as a step in between forums and debates where people could post their opinions in way that provided more structure than forums. While I understand that you do not have an interest in using that section, there is a large contingent of our member base that does. The Opinions section was not meant to recreate the Debates section or even act as a replacement. It is a supplement, an additional method for people to discuss topics that does not need to filter into the Debates section.

Polls could be a good springboard for people to debate one another, as it was originally intended, but as you mention, improvements need to be made on quality control for that new section to realize its potential.

3) The vision for the site is to create a flexible platform that allows people to debate, discuss and provide their opinions across all kind of topics. To say that we are focused solely on revenue, is a mischaracterization of our intentions. The revenue we are getting from the site as of right now, does not even come close to paying for the upkeep and resources required to keep the site running, let alone developing new features. If we were truly focused on revenue at any cost, we probably wouldn't put any time into Debate.org.

BUT, we aren't focused solely on revenue and we do actually care about quality and creating the best debating website online. We will be revisiting the ad placements we have on the site as we are not necessarily pleased with how they look and function in their current state either. We tested out the placements to see what kind of revenue uptick we would see and we now have enough data to make adjustments.

So, to answer your question, are we willing to make meaningful changes....yes. Will we be able to do them overnight, no. I do think that continued discussions such as this are helpful for us to really isolate what is important. When there are 500-1000 new forum posts a day, it is not the easiest task for us to sift through forum threads to pull out what is important to members, especially since there is always some level of disagreement.

One comment I will make about the server issues this weekend. In reality, we do not have issues with the size or the amount of memory that our servers have powering the site. The issue was due to a problem with a query/process that was running in the background with a memory leak. When that happens the memory it uses compounds and compounds until it cripples the server. We have identified that problematic process and rolled out a fix this afternoon.

Lastly, the features you outlined make sense to me and I agree they would improve the site if implemented. We have received quite a bit of feedback in terms of how team debates could function, but I do not believe there has been a consensus among the community on the ideal way. If there has, please point me to the thread discussing it and I will review it.

The chat functionality is pretty straightforward, so I do not need a lot detail there. The improved voting system is probably the feature I would be most excited about implementing, but would really love to hear ideas on the best way to implement this.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:24:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:15:03 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
At 3/17/2014 4:38:54 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

1. Quality control is needed. Most of the content on the internet is garbage. Without quality control you're going to let this seep into your website like you already have. It only takes a tiny bit of low quality stuff to pile up to drown out the higher quality content. You could have a glowing debate about natural rights but it only takes one debate with terrible grammar, forfeits etc to turn readers and voters off completely. If you don't want your site to die an inglorious death, quality control needs to rocket to the top of your priority list.

2. Opinion and Polls sections are basically useless although opinion section more so than polls. Opinion section is a harbor for people who just want to drop their junk and leave without and constructive dialogue. In fact, unless you want to comment there is no room for constructive dialogue. It's people talking past each other which has no place here. I see more where you were going with the Polls sections but due to lack of quality control it does not function at a level even close to high quality. If you want to get people's opinions do it in a debate or the forums, why do we need this useless middle ground?

3. What's the vision for the site? Obviously you guys got your revenue base by letting in the hoards of people from the internet with no real taste for debating. What the message that you have portrayed to us, the users, is that you got what you wanted. The site looks pretty, its full of people clicking to make dumb polls and leaving thus you have achieved some semblance of revenue parity and that's it. Your track record of late has been completely deaf to the desires of the community this site was built around. Are you willing to actually change things in a meaningful way? Or no? Because if not let us know now so we can find elsewhere to go.

These are the biggest things dragging this site down, that and the changes that people have wanted for a long time such as a chat feature, team debates and a better voting system that have gone unheeded. But I would caution against venturing into such projects if you can't even keep the base site running on your server load as is.

CP,

Thank you for responding so quickly, I appreciate it.

1) I 100% agree with you. The quality control methods we have in place worked well with a smaller user base, however now that the user base has grown considerably, improvements need to be made. The primary issue that makes moderating difficult is the sheer subjectivity of it. When instances are black and white, it is very easy to weed out problematic content. Enforcing quality that falls in a gray area is much more difficult and something we do need to improve upon. We have been outlining ideas on our end, but again if you or anyone else has input they would like to share, we welcome it.

2) The Opinions section was created to address that contingent of our member base that was in the in-between stages of debating. One of the biggest pieces of feedback we got from new members was that the Debates section was intimidating, so much so that many people did not even attempt to start a debate. The Opinions section was meant to act as a step in between forums and debates where people could post their opinions in way that provided more structure than forums. While I understand that you do not have an interest in using that section, there is a large contingent of our member base that does. The Opinions section was not meant to recreate the Debates section or even act as a replacement. It is a supplement, an additional method for people to discuss topics that does not need to filter into the Debates section.

Polls could be a good springboard for people to debate one another, as it was originally intended, but as you mention, improvements need to be made on quality control for that new section to realize its potential.

3) The vision for the site is to create a flexible platform that allows people to debate, discuss and provide their opinions across all kind of topics. To say that we are focused solely on revenue, is a mischaracterization of our intentions. The revenue we are getting from the site as of right now, does not even come close to paying for the upkeep and resources required to keep the site running, let alone developing new features. If we were truly focused on revenue at any cost, we probably wouldn't put any time into Debate.org.

BUT, we aren't focused solely on revenue and we do actually care about quality and creating the best debating website online. We will be revisiting the ad placements we have on the site as we are not necessarily pleased with how they look and function in their current state either. We tested out the placements to see what kind of revenue uptick we would see and we now have enough data to make adjustments.

So, to answer your question, are we willing to make meaningful changes....yes. Will we be able to do them overnight, no. I do think that continued discussions such as this are helpful for us to really isolate what is important. When there are 500-1000 new forum posts a day, it is not the easiest task for us to sift through forum threads to pull out what is important to members, especially since there is always some level of disagreement.

One comment I will make about the server issues this weekend. In reality, we do not have issues with the size or the amount of memory that our servers have powering the site. The issue was due to a problem with a query/process that was running in the background with a memory leak. When that happens the memory it uses compounds and compounds until it cripples the server. We have identified that problematic process and rolled out a fix this afternoon.

Lastly, the features you outlined make sense to me and I agree they would improve the site if implemented. We have received quite a bit of feedback in terms of how team debates could function, but I do not believe there has been a consensus among the community on the ideal way. If there has, please point me to the thread discussing it and I will review it.

The chat functionality is pretty straightforward, so I do not need a lot detail there. The improved voting system is probably the feature I would be most excited about implementing, but would really love to hear ideas on the best way to implement this.

Thanks for clearing a few things up. While I'm glad you have taken the time to do so I am still slightly skeptical about the future. Actions speak louder than words and I feel like I've heard this all before yet not too much has been implemented. At the end of the day it's your site and what you do with it is up to y'all.

However, you have placated me enough to keep me around for now. At the same time, the site has become far less enjoyable to use and that's from experience. Your words don't change that, you said it yourself, you don't sift through all of the forum posts and polls etc so you don't really know what its like to be a frequent user.

Hopefully some quality control comes quickly to the site and with it a return to actual quality. But as I said, I am skeptical.

Thanks for your response!
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.
-- 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 --
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:40:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Or even a PayPal donation site, people would donate if they knew their money would help speed along the things they want out of it.
Bullish
Posts: 3,527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:44:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Juggle did ask for help. With pay. Crumbelievable made a thread a couple of months ago.
0x5f3759df
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 5:51:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:44:36 PM, Bullish wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Juggle did ask for help. With pay. Crumbelievable made a thread a couple of months ago.

I remembered that. But their issue right now is monetary resources. I'm saying they don't need to pay... Most people where would volunteer. Many of them have already volunteered.
-- 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 --
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:02:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.



So sassy.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:05:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:02:31 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.



So sassy.

I'm full of sass. But in all honesty it was a moment of horrible irritation when I couldn't get into the forums then when I did get into the forums I was met by the now-usual mundane stuff that has been the norm lately and I made this video.

In all honesty, I might leave DDO, I might not but I feel I have the right to my displeasure. At the very least, I want to start a dialogue and give the other site a chance. If you're happy with DDO I'm happy for you, sadly I'm not right now. That's the point of my frustration.

It may blow over, I may leave but for now who knows.
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:08:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:40:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Or even a PayPal donation site, people would donate if they knew their money would help speed along the things they want out of it.

I certainly appreciate the offers, but our goal is to keep the site free for everyone to use. One of the biggest reasons we all want to improve the site is because we have a member base that is so passionate about the site. It is much better than the alternative, having a site no one cares about.

The biggest area where we could use assistance is with quality control. We have a number of automated measures in place to catch obvious spam and sensitive content, but it does not tackle the gray areas.

Airmax is an excellent moderator for much of the Debate/Forums/Member issues, but he is not responsible for the Polls or Opinions sections. The volume is simply too large to request a single member do that.

I would love to be able to create a mechanism to allow a selected group of members to help preserve quality control of the site. There are a few issues I see with this approach, one of them being subjectivity and bias from moderator to moderator. Perhaps it is unavoidable but it is a concern nonetheless.

We do have some mechanisms in place to allow members to influence or report problematic content.

If you would be willing to help, I would love to do a test for a week or two, where an organized group of members report low quality content using the report flags surfaced on the site. That mechanism puts content into a queue where we will review it internally and remove the content, if appropriate.

As active members of the site, you have the closest eye on the content being created each day. If you would really like to help us improve the quality of the site, I would certainly welcome a 1-2 week trial run in which we test out having a designated group of members who flag content to help us isolate the problem areas or members.

After the trial period, we can regroup and find ways to improve the process. Outside of yourself, if you know of others who would be willing to participate, let me know and we can coordinate getting the ball rolling.

Thoughts?
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:10:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:08:04 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:40:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Or even a PayPal donation site, people would donate if they knew their money would help speed along the things they want out of it.

I certainly appreciate the offers, but our goal is to keep the site free for everyone to use. One of the biggest reasons we all want to improve the site is because we have a member base that is so passionate about the site. It is much better than the alternative, having a site no one cares about.

The biggest area where we could use assistance is with quality control. We have a number of automated measures in place to catch obvious spam and sensitive content, but it does not tackle the gray areas.

Airmax is an excellent moderator for much of the Debate/Forums/Member issues, but he is not responsible for the Polls or Opinions sections. The volume is simply too large to request a single member do that.

I would love to be able to create a mechanism to allow a selected group of members to help preserve quality control of the site. There are a few issues I see with this approach, one of them being subjectivity and bias from moderator to moderator. Perhaps it is unavoidable but it is a concern nonetheless.

We do have some mechanisms in place to allow members to influence or report problematic content.

If you would be willing to help, I would love to do a test for a week or two, where an organized group of members report low quality content using the report flags surfaced on the site. That mechanism puts content into a queue where we will review it internally and remove the content, if appropriate.

As active members of the site, you have the closest eye on the content being created each day. If you would really like to help us improve the quality of the site, I would certainly welcome a 1-2 week trial run in which we test out having a designated group of members who flag content to help us isolate the problem areas or members.

After the trial period, we can regroup and find ways to improve the process. Outside of yourself, if you know of others who would be willing to participate, let me know and we can coordinate getting the ball rolling.

Thoughts?

I sign up.
1- Donald.Keller
-- 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 --
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:10:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:46:34 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:44:58 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.



Cry-baby, leave already.

I'm making valid complaints about the site. I am the consumer and I have a right to voice my worries. It prompted a quick response from Juggle which is what the intention was. In fact, as a whole, I am happy with the result of the video. I'm not sure what the problem here is.

Also, I was not able to actually watch the video you posted. Upon clicking it, I received a message saying the video was private. Just an FYI.
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:11:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:08:04 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:

Airmax is an excellent moderator for much of the Debate/Forums/Member issues, but he is not responsible for the Polls or Opinions sections. The volume is simply too large to request a single member do that.

You underestimate my power ;D

I would love to be able to create a mechanism to allow a selected group of members to help preserve quality control of the site. There are a few issues I see with this approach, one of them being subjectivity and bias from moderator to moderator. Perhaps it is unavoidable but it is a concern nonetheless.

We do have some mechanisms in place to allow members to influence or report problematic content.

If you would be willing to help, I would love to do a test for a week or two, where an organized group of members report low quality content using the report flags surfaced on the site. That mechanism puts content into a queue where we will review it internally and remove the content, if appropriate.

As active members of the site, you have the closest eye on the content being created each day. If you would really like to help us improve the quality of the site, I would certainly welcome a 1-2 week trial run in which we test out having a designated group of members who flag content to help us isolate the problem areas or members.

After the trial period, we can regroup and find ways to improve the process. Outside of yourself, if you know of others who would be willing to participate, let me know and we can coordinate getting the ball rolling.

Thoughts?
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
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:14:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:08:04 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:40:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:35:11 PM, donald.keller wrote:
There are many talented members here. Roy, TUF, Larz... Believe it or not, but most of them would work for free to keep the site working. They have passion. All Juggle has to do is ask for help.

I believe Juggle could also do a Kickstarter. Many people would help.

Or even a PayPal donation site, people would donate if they knew their money would help speed along the things they want out of it.

I certainly appreciate the offers, but our goal is to keep the site free for everyone to use. One of the biggest reasons we all want to improve the site is because we have a member base that is so passionate about the site. It is much better than the alternative, having a site no one cares about.

The biggest area where we could use assistance is with quality control. We have a number of automated measures in place to catch obvious spam and sensitive content, but it does not tackle the gray areas.

Airmax is an excellent moderator for much of the Debate/Forums/Member issues, but he is not responsible for the Polls or Opinions sections. The volume is simply too large to request a single member do that.

I would love to be able to create a mechanism to allow a selected group of members to help preserve quality control of the site. There are a few issues I see with this approach, one of them being subjectivity and bias from moderator to moderator. Perhaps it is unavoidable but it is a concern nonetheless.

We do have some mechanisms in place to allow members to influence or report problematic content.

If you would be willing to help, I would love to do a test for a week or two, where an organized group of members report low quality content using the report flags surfaced on the site. That mechanism puts content into a queue where we will review it internally and remove the content, if appropriate.

As active members of the site, you have the closest eye on the content being created each day. If you would really like to help us improve the quality of the site, I would certainly welcome a 1-2 week trial run in which we test out having a designated group of members who flag content to help us isolate the problem areas or members.

After the trial period, we can regroup and find ways to improve the process. Outside of yourself, if you know of others who would be willing to participate, let me know and we can coordinate getting the ball rolling.

Thoughts?

That sounds like a solid idea. Obviously bias could not be a part of this process but I would definitely volunteer some time to flagging things that are low quality content.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:16:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:10:55 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:46:34 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 3/17/2014 5:44:58 PM, Zarroette wrote:
At 3/17/2014 1:39:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
My irritation with the status of the site and of the wonderful company "managing" it is coming to a head. This site has become nearly unusable, between the idiots pouring in and the server overload and lack of constructive oversight. It's really getting ridiculous. I'm about to join edb8 and say to hell with it all.



Cry-baby, leave already.

I'm making valid complaints about the site. I am the consumer and I have a right to voice my worries. It prompted a quick response from Juggle which is what the intention was. In fact, as a whole, I am happy with the result of the video. I'm not sure what the problem here is.

Also, I was not able to actually watch the video you posted. Upon clicking it, I received a message saying the video was private. Just an FYI.

Also, honestly, just seeing someone from Juggle post on the site like you have today, really boosts confidence in what's going on.

I know the president is supposed to be the liaison between the two groups but we all know that TUF has little inside knowledge of what's actually going on so this really has helped today. FYI.
Debate.org_Official
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:41:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Yeah, nice job guys a critical thread finally gets juggles attention and the first thing that happens is a flame war. Bang up job
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:42:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP
thett3

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

A one judge, one vote system. The current template is absolute nonsense. I'm actually debating Roy on the subject right now, and my round will be up very soon.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:43:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

In response to your second point, people feel the voting system is too easily manipulated. People can clearly have better points but through friends and vague RFDs points can be awarded to a debater who did not deserve them.

A better system, one that I think would also increase voting, would be a one person, one vote system. This way, you give one single RFD for the debate that really should be based upon who's points were better, and you award your single point to the person. It'd be less confusing, less easy to manipulate and would force people to vote on debates more comprehensively.

Honestly, if one side uses "better" sources, which is subjective anyways, and still makes crap points they don't deserve the 2 points for better sources in my opinion.
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 5,087
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:45:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:42:40 PM, thett3 wrote:
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP
thett3

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

A one judge, one vote system. The current template is absolute nonsense. I'm actually debating Roy on the subject right now, and my round will be up very soon.

I'd recommend a similar system to larz's. It's worth one point, but if you provide more of an RFD, your vote becomes more valuable.
#UnbanTheMadman

#StandWithBossy

#BetOnThett

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16

https://docs.google.com...
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:49:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP
-Robert

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

-An app would increase time spent on this site, and with the added convenience, hopefully voting.

- A thumbs up, thumbs down button on votes, but there would be an algorithm to weight the thumb depending on experience the user has (to minimize spam under that system). This could increase and decrease the value of the vote, and/or lead to better leaderboards. Maybe even a type of voting elo sort of thing.

-A DDO gambling system, where you can bet on debates that you haven't voted on. We would need some sort of fake currency to go with it (DDO Points, or something). The way you get DDO points is by voting.

-Annotation RFD option. People could annotate debates for their RFDs, and users could click through highlighted portions. This would make voting more interactive and make it easier to write a proper RFD without printing.

-Print PDF of debates. I want to be able to print debates without the gunk so I can properly annotate debates.

-A desktop app that allows users to save debates for offline viewing.
-
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:52:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 5:15:03 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:


It's been awhile since Juggle talked to the users directly, so thanks for opening a dialogue.


2) The Opinions section was created to address that contingent of our member base that was in the in-between stages of debating. One of the biggest pieces of feedback we got from new members was that the Debates section was intimidating, so much so that many people did not even attempt to start a debate. The Opinions section was meant to act as a step in between forums and debates where people could post their opinions in way that provided more structure than forums. While I understand that you do not have an interest in using that section, there is a large contingent of our member base that does. The Opinions section was not meant to recreate the Debates section or even act as a replacement. It is a supplement, an additional method for people to discuss topics that does not need to filter into the Debates section.

Polls could be a good springboard for people to debate one another, as it was originally intended, but as you mention, improvements need to be made on quality control for that new section to realize its potential.

I never really bought this explanation. It seems like Juggle just took the functionality of Juggle.com and ported it over to DDO. Juggle.com used to have polls like the ones on here now, but now it is only a corporate website. As a former debater and coach, I can tell you that no one can actually learn to debate from writing or responding to a poll question. If anything, it sends the wrong message (that winning votes is about finding people who already agree with you). imo, if Juggle really wanted to help people learn to debate, it would create a flash tutorial that walks someone through finding a topic, instigating a debate, drafting an argument, and using Google to find some statistical support for that argument.

But let's say I lay my skepticism aside, what is the conversion rate from polls to long-time users [this is a pretty standard question any VC would ask], i.e. how many people who come to the site and start in the poll section end up staying and doing - say - 10 or more debates?

If the number isn't high and the people who actually use the site to debate don't like the polls, then you can't justify them based on appealing to users, so you can see why some people would think the polls are merely to boost page visits in order to appeal more to advertisers.

Page visits is the only reason I can see for there being a random blog section attached to the site. Obviously, it's Juggle's website so you can do whatever you want with the site, but at last to me, it seems like a site struggling for an identity. Facebook tries to do everything to enhance the user experience or to at least get people to spend more time on the site. In contrast, many parts of DDO are currently designed to appeal to a tiny subset of one-off visitors (many of which are not regular users).

3) The vision for the site is to create a flexible platform that allows people to debate, discuss and provide their opinions across all kind of topics. To say that we are focused solely on revenue, is a mischaracterization of our intentions. The revenue we are getting from the site as of right now, does not even come close to paying for the upkeep and resources required to keep the site running, let alone developing new features. If we were truly focused on revenue at any cost, we probably wouldn't put any time into Debate.org.

This certainly makes me slightly less skeptical about Juggle. You are definitely entitled to make at least enough money to keep the site running. But I still wish you could do it in a way that preferenced the site's core functionality. Currently, I feel like this is 3 sites (a debate site, a poll site [a bit like Yahoo answers], and a blog site).

BUT, we aren't focused solely on revenue and we do actually care about quality and creating the best debating website online. We will be revisiting the ad placements we have on the site as we are not necessarily pleased with how they look and function in their current state either. We tested out the placements to see what kind of revenue uptick we would see and we now have enough data to make adjustments.

So, to answer your question, are we willing to make meaningful changes....yes. Will we be able to do them overnight, no. I do think that continued discussions such as this are helpful for us to really isolate what is important. When there are 500-1000 new forum posts a day, it is not the easiest task for us to sift through forum threads to pull out what is important to members, especially since there is always some level of disagreement.

One comment I will make about the server issues this weekend. In reality, we do not have issues with the size or the amount of memory that our servers have powering the site. The issue was due to a problem with a query/process that was running in the background with a memory leak. When that happens the memory it uses compounds and compounds until it cripples the server. We have identified that problematic process and rolled out a fix this afternoon.

Thanks for fixing this :)

Lastly, the features you outlined make sense to me and I agree they would improve the site if implemented. We have received quite a bit of feedback in terms of how team debates could function, but I do not believe there has been a consensus among the community on the ideal way. If there has, please point me to the thread discussing it and I will review it.

The easiest way, and the way it is done in Policy debate [competitive debate] is simply to alternate. If you have Pro 1 (P1), Pro 2 (P2), Con 1 (C1) and Con2 (C2), the rounds would go:

P1
C1
P2
C2
P1
C1
P2
C2

You're never going to get an absolute consensus on here about anything, but that's the easiest and most logical system to implement, and I think most of the people on the site who have done competitive debate (like me, thett, raisor, larz) would agree.

The chat functionality is pretty straightforward, so I do not need a lot detail there. The improved voting system is probably the feature I would be most excited about implementing, but would really love to hear ideas on the best way to implement this.

I'm definitely excited about having chat on here. As to the voting system, there was a lot of support for simply eliminating the conduct, spelling & grammar, and sources points. Competitive debate chooses to judge debaters only on arguments. There was a lot of support when I posted this idea in a thread awhile ago. Roy was the only person to really disagree because he thought that the voting system should be more like figure skating, which assigns multiple points on a sliding scale in multiple categories. But his analogy fails because experts in figure skating have decided that's the best way to judge figure skating, whereas the people who care the most about the outcome of debates [such as professional coaches who spend their entire lives living vicariously through their students' wins and whose very livelihood depends on their students winning and learning] have agreed that a straight win/loss based on best argument is the ideal system.

So the new system would simply say: "The better debating was done by __________ [pick a side]"
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Jifpop09
Posts: 2,243
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:52:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:49:24 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP
-Robert

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

-An app would increase time spent on this site, and with the added convenience, hopefully voting.

- A thumbs up, thumbs down button on votes, but there would be an algorithm to weight the thumb depending on experience the user has (to minimize spam under that system). This could increase and decrease the value of the vote, and/or lead to better leaderboards. Maybe even a type of voting elo sort of thing.

-A DDO gambling system, where you can bet on debates that you haven't voted on. We would need some sort of fake currency to go with it (DDO Points, or something). The way you get DDO points is by voting.

-Annotation RFD option. People could annotate debates for their RFDs, and users could click through highlighted portions. This would make voting more interactive and make it easier to write a proper RFD without printing.

-Print PDF of debates. I want to be able to print debates without the gunk so I can properly annotate debates.

-A desktop app that allows users to save debates for offline viewing.
-

1. There's not already an app? This should be a priority.

2.. Not sure if I agree with the voting system. Would lead to trolling, or isolating people who differ in opinion.

3. That is a great idea. You win like DDO points for winning debates. Not sure how they can be used though, but it sounds cool.
Leader of the DDO Revolution Party
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/17/2014 6:53:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/17/2014 6:39:46 PM, Debate.org_Official wrote:
If we could get the conversation back on track, I would appreciate it. The back and forth arguing is not particularly constructive.

There are a couple of areas in which I requested input/assistance.

1) A group of members who would be willing to assist in a quality control test, so far I have:
- donald.keller
- CP

2) What are some ideas for implement a new voting system or a mechanism to increase voting?

Just automatically deleting debates where both sides forfeited multiple rounds would be a quick and easy step to improve voting (in my opinion)
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