Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Vote Deletion by Mutual Consent?

Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 12:50:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I haven't thought this idea through very much, but I thought I'd just throw it out there anyways:

Should there be a way for a vote to be deleted by the debaters themselves if they both of them agree that particular vote is stupid?

A lot of times, reports take a long time to get to the moderators, and even when they do, sometimes those reports are either ignored or not really handled well at all.

For example, on the RoyLatham vs. Mikal debate, a particular voter gave all 7 points to Roy because he agreed with him, and after the vote got reported, the voter just added a couple of meaningless sentences to make his vote-bomb "valid" such as "Pro's arguments were more convincing..."

I think both Roy and Mikal could agree that is an invalid vote regardless of the changes made to it...

What do y'all think?
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 5,081
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 12:52:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/18/2014 12:50:44 PM, Romanii wrote:
I haven't thought this idea through very much, but I thought I'd just throw it out there anyways:

Should there be a way for a vote to be deleted by the debaters themselves if they both of them agree that particular vote is stupid?

A lot of times, reports take a long time to get to the moderators, and even when they do, sometimes those reports are either ignored or not really handled well at all.

For example, on the RoyLatham vs. Mikal debate, a particular voter gave all 7 points to Roy because he agreed with him, and after the vote got reported, the voter just added a couple of meaningless sentences to make his vote-bomb "valid" such as "Pro's arguments were more convincing..."

I think both Roy and Mikal could agree that is an invalid vote regardless of the changes made to it...

What do y'all think?

I concur.
#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...
CJKAllstar
Posts: 408
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 12:56:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/18/2014 12:50:44 PM, Romanii wrote:
I haven't thought this idea through very much, but I thought I'd just throw it out there anyways:

Should there be a way for a vote to be deleted by the debaters themselves if they both of them agree that particular vote is stupid?

A lot of times, reports take a long time to get to the moderators, and even when they do, sometimes those reports are either ignored or not really handled well at all.

For example, on the RoyLatham vs. Mikal debate, a particular voter gave all 7 points to Roy because he agreed with him, and after the vote got reported, the voter just added a couple of meaningless sentences to make his vote-bomb "valid" such as "Pro's arguments were more convincing..."

I think both Roy and Mikal could agree that is an invalid vote regardless of the changes made to it...

What do y'all think?

Heh, you must have seen my post. I think you can see that I am assuredly in favour of this.

+10^10^100
"Political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." - George Orwell
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 1:28:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I agree with the concept, but I question whether this would actually work in practice. For instance, if there's a votebomb in Person A's favor that is ostensibly plausible -- e.g., "Pro's arguments were more convincing -- I doubt he or she would be willing to cede to Person B's whims that it's actually a truly nonsensical vote, so I don't see this working in practice.

To add an addendum to it, though: how about adding community pressure to the mix? For instance, Person B could formally propose to Person A to have a vote removed, and if Person A denies, the community would then have a vote on it over the course of, say, 24 hours.

It has some kinks in it, obviously, but it could conceivably work.
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 1:38:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/18/2014 1:28:04 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
I agree with the concept, but I question whether this would actually work in practice. For instance, if there's a votebomb in Person A's favor that is ostensibly plausible -- e.g., "Pro's arguments were more convincing -- I doubt he or she would be willing to cede to Person B's whims that it's actually a truly nonsensical vote, so I don't see this working in practice.

I suppose if one of the sides were dishonest they could purposefully disagree in order to score a cheap win, but I would like to think the majority of regular debaters on the site are honest enough to recognize such generic statements to be invalid RFDs even when they are going in their own favor...


To add an addendum to it, though: how about adding community pressure to the mix? For instance, Person B could formally propose to Person A to have a vote removed, and if Person A denies, the community would then have a vote on it over the course of, say, 24 hours.

But how big would the "community" be? Most of my debates have gotten anywhere from 2-5 votes on them, and even out of that number, I doubt that all of those guys come back to check on the debate later, so they wouldn't see that I've attempted to get a vote deleted.
At best, we're looking at 1-3 people voting on the deletion of a vote.
And then we'd also have to worry about THOSE guys being biased about their voting of votes... XD

Good idea, though!


It has some kinks in it, obviously, but it could conceivably work.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 1:44:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I've considered this idea before.

It really just turns the person who the vote is in favor of into a moderator. That person will be harassed by his or her opponent (and possibly others) until he or she agrees to remove the vote.

This system works fine for obvious vote bombs (7 points), but doesn't work well for anything less because it leads to undue pressure. Dealing with voting on a high-profile debate is stressful enough. Having both sides attacking each other people they refuse to remove marginal votes just ups the stakes.

Airmax does a pretty good job of removing votes. And that's going to be quicker than taking your case to your opponent in most cases.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
progressivedem22
Posts: 1,304
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 2:42:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 4/18/2014 1:38:52 PM, Romanii wrote:
At 4/18/2014 1:28:04 PM, progressivedem22 wrote:
I agree with the concept, but I question whether this would actually work in practice. For instance, if there's a votebomb in Person A's favor that is ostensibly plausible -- e.g., "Pro's arguments were more convincing -- I doubt he or she would be willing to cede to Person B's whims that it's actually a truly nonsensical vote, so I don't see this working in practice.

I suppose if one of the sides were dishonest they could purposefully disagree in order to score a cheap win, but I would like to think the majority of regular debaters on the site are honest enough to recognize such generic statements to be invalid RFDs even when they are going in their own favor...

I completely agree with you that the majority of DDO'ers are very trust-worthy. But there unfortunately are some who aren't. Frankly, if there weren't, we wouldn't be discussing how we can update the voting system. So I worry that this system may provide them with more leverage than they ought to have.

To add an addendum to it, though: how about adding community pressure to the mix? For instance, Person B could formally propose to Person A to have a vote removed, and if Person A denies, the community would then have a vote on it over the course of, say, 24 hours.

But how big would the "community" be? Most of my debates have gotten anywhere from 2-5 votes on them, and even out of that number, I doubt that all of those guys come back to check on the debate later, so they wouldn't see that I've attempted to get a vote deleted.

Fair point on this one...and if "community" is defined as "whoever sees the debate and bothers to vote in 24 hours," we have an even larger problem on our hands..

At best, we're looking at 1-3 people voting on the deletion of a vote.
And then we'd also have to worry about THOSE guys being biased about their voting of votes... XD

Good idea, though!


It has some kinks in it, obviously, but it could conceivably work.
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2014 9:39:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
rross and I agreed a short while ago that a vote on our debate was patently biased. After consulting with airmax, the vote was removed, and the win deservedly went to rross.

I think, however, that the mod should examin the vote too. It is not enough for the debaters to agree, and unbiased mod must also do so.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


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

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

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

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...