Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

undefeated tourney

UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 12:46:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
[72] JohnMaynardKeynes
[54] Ragnar
[53] KhalifV
[45] RyuuKyuzo
[40] Blade-of-Truth
[25] Sargon
[25] superbowl9
[14] Sashil

do it naaao
only one shall preserve their win record >:D
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 12:51:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 12:46:50 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
[72] JohnMaynardKeynes
[54] Ragnar
[53] KhalifV
[45] RyuuKyuzo
[40] Blade-of-Truth
[25] Sargon
[25] superbowl9
[14] Sashil

do it naaao
only one shall preserve their win record >:D

What about Maikuru?
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 12:52:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 12:51:06 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
At 8/28/2014 12:46:50 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
[72] JohnMaynardKeynes
[54] Ragnar
[53] KhalifV
[45] RyuuKyuzo
[40] Blade-of-Truth
[25] Sargon
[25] superbowl9
[14] Sashil

do it naaao
only one shall preserve their win record >:D

What about Maikuru?

he hasn't done a debate in over a year and basically only logs in to receive PMs for live mafia.... i doubt he would be up for it.
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 12:57:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
You'll never get enough of us to agree to this to get an actual tourney going. Nobody wants to risk their record.

Having said that, I'd bet I could clear half this list if my opponent had to instigate and accept the BoP. A lot of these guys look like they've never had to do that.
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:09:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 12:57:04 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
You'll never get enough of us to agree to this to get an actual tourney going. Nobody wants to risk their record.

that's true... though i have heard from johnmaynardkeynes that people have brought this up before and that some of the undefeated users were actually expressing interest in participating....


Having said that, I'd bet I could clear half this list if my opponent had to instigate and accept the BoP. A lot of these guys look like they've never had to do that.

nah. all of them have at least once except for Blade-of-Truth, who hasn't instigated a single debate in his entire time on DDO lol.
i agree you could clear most of them, though... you and Sargon are the only ones who have taken on opponents with exceptional debating skill.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:10:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
that being said, based on their debate,s JMK, khalifv, and ragnar all do seem to have exceptional skill but simply choose not to challenge themselves with tougher opponents.
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:10:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Back in my day, the undefeateds were terrifying.

Maikuru is one of 3 people who can say they've beaten bluesteel

J. Kenyon once instigated a debate arguing for Santa's existence -- and won.

Even young Smithereens was a theological beast who could boast some impressive wins.

None of them debate anymore though... I don't know, I just don't think you new-school kids compare.
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
RyuuKyuzo
Posts: 3,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:16:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 1:09:36 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 8/28/2014 12:57:04 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
You'll never get enough of us to agree to this to get an actual tourney going. Nobody wants to risk their record.

that's true... though i have heard from johnmaynardkeynes that people have brought this up before and that some of the undefeated users were actually expressing interest in participating....


Having said that, I'd bet I could clear half this list if my opponent had to instigate and accept the BoP. A lot of these guys look like they've never had to do that.

nah. all of them have at least once except for Blade-of-Truth, who hasn't instigated a single debate in his entire time on DDO lol.
i agree you could clear most of them, though... you and Sargon are the only ones who have taken on opponents with exceptional debating skill.

Hmm. It looks like Sargon managed to break 4000 elo in 25 debates. I'll have to check this guy out.
If you're reading this, you're awesome and you should feel awesome.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:16:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 1:10:58 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Back in my day, the undefeateds were terrifying.

Maikuru is one of 3 people who can say they've beaten bluesteel

meh... the voting on that debate wasn't very good


J. Kenyon once instigated a debate arguing for Santa's existence -- and won.

well j.kenyon is even more of a god than bluesteel, so it's not fair to compare him to other debaters like that.


Even young Smithereens was a theological beast who could boast some impressive wins.

i wanna see him debate sargon


None of them debate anymore though... I don't know, I just don't think you new-school kids compare.

*cries in a corner*
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 1:17:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 1:16:14 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
At 8/28/2014 1:09:36 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 8/28/2014 12:57:04 AM, RyuuKyuzo wrote:
You'll never get enough of us to agree to this to get an actual tourney going. Nobody wants to risk their record.

that's true... though i have heard from johnmaynardkeynes that people have brought this up before and that some of the undefeated users were actually expressing interest in participating....


Having said that, I'd bet I could clear half this list if my opponent had to instigate and accept the BoP. A lot of these guys look like they've never had to do that.

nah. all of them have at least once except for Blade-of-Truth, who hasn't instigated a single debate in his entire time on DDO lol.
i agree you could clear most of them, though... you and Sargon are the only ones who have taken on opponents with exceptional debating skill.

Hmm. It looks like Sargon managed to break 4000 elo in 25 debates. I'll have to check this guy out.

Raisor, KRFournier, and Popculturepooka are among his victims.
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2014 3:19:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I meant to have some hard debates this summer, then my best friend got married and I was stuck on helper mode (where her family and bridesmaids went, I don't have a clue). On the up side I managed to finish that guide (shameless plug).

Maybe one day I'll get around to the following three:
1. Felony murder rule
2. AGOT: Jon Snow's parentage
3. Star Trek: Picard was a Kahn
Unofficial DDO Guide: http://goo.gl...
(It's probably the best help resource here, other than talking to people...)

Voting Standards: https://goo.gl...

And please disable Smart-Quotes: https://goo.gl...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 1:45:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 12:46:50 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:

so... that leaves us with...

[53] KhalifV
[45] RyuuKyuzo
[40] Blade-of-Truth
[25] Sargon

...
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:18:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...

.......holy sh!t. did someone ACTUALLY take the time to write a 28 page paper on this site's voting issues? O_o
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:22:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 2:18:47 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...

.......holy sh!t. did someone ACTUALLY take the time to write a 28 page paper on this site's voting issues? O_o

Yes. The big question is, will anybody ACTUALLY read it? I skimmed. It's good.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:24:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 2:22:25 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 9/3/2014 2:18:47 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...

.......holy sh!t. did someone ACTUALLY take the time to write a 28 page paper on this site's voting issues? O_o

Yes. The big question is, will anybody ACTUALLY read it? I skimmed. It's good.

i'll give it a read. maybe it will help with my insomnia.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:28:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 2:24:56 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 2:22:25 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 9/3/2014 2:18:47 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...

.......holy sh!t. did someone ACTUALLY take the time to write a 28 page paper on this site's voting issues? O_o

Yes. The big question is, will anybody ACTUALLY read it? I skimmed. It's good.

i'll give it a read. maybe it will help with my insomnia.

lol
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:30:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

While some of that may be going on, I think this is overstated. Most of the debaters listed above, are legitimately good debaters.

You seen this paper? It's all about the voting corruption on this site. But what can be done about it?

http://www.grpatten.com...

This paper is really interesting and when I saw it for the first time I was quite tickled by the fact that these individuals would write such a detailed analysis of DDO. There's some really great stuff in that paper and I encourage everyone to read it. However, that paper was written over four years ago, which in DDO terms makes it relatively ancient.

There are also some key flaws to the paper. For instance, it considers DDO to largely be a Christian community and that it reflects those values. But later in the paper it states that the community values are surprising.

"Some aspects of the community are very interesting, and unexpected, considering the strong Christian demographics of the site."

"The first and perhaps most obvious embedded value of the site is the simple belief that the best argument should win a debate, no matter what the topic is."

"In the debate entitled "Homeless People Deserve to be Where They Are," the 'pro' side won by a rather significant margin " 12 to 3. (MeganLoaskia and InsertNameHere, 2010) The pro side did appear subjectively to have the stronger argument, which makes sense, as the pro side emerged as victorious. This example illustrates the community"s insistence to reward the best argued debate, rather than the more morally grounded side."

I think more importantly the paper continues to point out that ultimately what matters is which sides debates better, especially within the broader concepts of what the paper is about, DDO and democracy:

"Yet, the umbrella of Debate.org means that each debate is worthy of debate no matter how outlandish or controversial the topic may be. Any fair proposition with two sides is open to debate and will most likely be embraced by the community with few exceptions."

"The community has clearly made a decision to treat every viewpoint with respect and dignity."

"For those that argue that Debate.org is a democratic community, this aspect of Debate.org is certainly among the most democratic. "

Following this though, I think the authors overstate the Christian nature of the site:

"It seems like a very democratic community on the surface, being very much open to debate, yet when one digs below the surface the democratic nature of the site is not so obvious anymore. As Cass Sunstein points out, cocooning can most definitely occur in online communities and with a majority of the Debate.org community identifying their religion as Christian, the possibility exists for a cocoon to form."

...

"With a disturbing lack of anonymity, friends of users may be subtly pressured to vote for their own friends in debates Democracy and Debate.org rather than be seen as voting against them."

While this is true, it is mitigated by the addition of required RFDs since the paper was written. While not perfect, the votes placed must provide a reason for the vote that does prevent some of the worst voting possibilities. It's not perfect, but it (along with other methods) does significantly reduce strictly ideological and friend-based voting.

...

Anyways, I think there is a reasonable point to be made, though I don't think it's necessarily the case in the examples above, or often the case with voting in general. It certainly happens, but with a large enough sample I think we can determine that those who win a decent percentage of their debates do so because they are legitimately good debaters and not because of unfair outside influence. Of course, everything in this paper, and everything I have just said is entirely debatable.
Debate.org Moderator
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 2:40:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 2:30:07 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

While some of that may be going on, I think this is overstated. Most of the debaters listed above, are legitimately good debaters.

Yes good point. It was unfair to say that when I don't know them at all. Just before I read this thread I was reading a debate from a year ago where one side seemed to clearly win to me, but lost out on the voting, and even thought there were RFDs, they seem vague.

http://www.debate.org...

I shouldn't just the entire site on one debate, but I didn't think anyone would pay attention to my opinion much either. The possibility of voting alliances still exists though.

"With a disturbing lack of anonymity, friends of users may be subtly pressured to vote for their own friends in debates Democracy and Debate.org rather than be seen as voting against them."

While this is true, it is mitigated by the addition of required RFDs since the paper was written. While not perfect, the votes placed must provide a reason for the vote that does prevent some of the worst voting possibilities. It's not perfect, but it (along with other methods) does significantly reduce strictly ideological and friend-based voting.

Okay. :)

Anyways, I think there is a reasonable point to be made, though I don't think it's necessarily the case in the examples above, or often the case with voting in general. It certainly happens, but with a large enough sample I think we can determine that those who win a decent percentage of their debates do so because they are legitimately good debaters and not because of unfair outside influence. Of course, everything in this paper, and everything I have just said is entirely debatable.

If a bias is consistent, then I don't think the sample size makes any difference.
For me, the moral is that you have to judge people on their merits. I haven't judged those undefeated on their merits at all, I just made a random comment and I'm sorry if it seems harsh. I was just chatting.
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/28/2014 12:46:50 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
[72] JohnMaynardKeynes

Don't disagree with him on anything that actually matters. Except that cats are better than dogs... that has debate potential should he ever return.

[54] Ragnar

Been wanting to debate him for months - was trying to have a 50 win/0 loss record and challenge him for a 50 vs 50 match but now I need to get up to 54.

[53] KhalifV

Don't know him well enough to know if we have any major disagreements worth debating.

[45] RyuuKyuzo

I'll rap battle you. Take away speed and you got nothing. Original text, no voice - you down? PM me if you are. Or just send me the challenge. Whatever you'd like. I just don't appreciate the big-talk about the new guys being easy wins should you take them on. Let's go.

[25] Sargon

Love reading his debates. but they are usually on topics that go over my head though. He's a brilliant young man.

[25] superbowl9

Who is that?

[14] Sashil

Who is that?

do it naaao
only one shall preserve their win record >:D

I tried to get this going a few months ago at the beginning of summer, no-one was really down.

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:14:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 2:40:55 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 9/3/2014 2:30:07 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 9/3/2014 1:56:09 AM, Garbanza wrote:
I bet a lot of people with undefeated records having voting alliances, or just get their friends to vote for them.

While some of that may be going on, I think this is overstated. Most of the debaters listed above, are legitimately good debaters.

Yes good point. It was unfair to say that when I don't know them at all. Just before I read this thread I was reading a debate from a year ago where one side seemed to clearly win to me, but lost out on the voting, and even thought there were RFDs, they seem vague.

http://www.debate.org...


There is no doubt that there are certainly some problematic votes on that debate. The standards have changed a bit since then, but even today, we doubtlessly have issues that still need to be resolved.

I shouldn't just the entire site on one debate, but I didn't think anyone would pay attention to my opinion much either. The possibility of voting alliances still exists though.


Everyone's opinion matters, and though I hadn't noticed you before this comment, I certainly figured it was worth engaging you on the topic, and I appreciate that you have engaged me.

There are flaws with the voting system, I just haven't seen a lot of evidence to call some of these problems "voting alliances". It's very likely true that members have friends that will often vote for them (I think it's fair to say that this is happening to some degree), but to characterize this as something larger - a conspiracy among a decent number of individuals - is simply something I haven't seen. It may be true, I may just not be aware of it. If you do have any evidence of this happening, please contact me privately because it would constitute a problem that needs to be resolved.

"With a disturbing lack of anonymity, friends of users may be subtly pressured to vote for their own friends in debates Democracy and Debate.org rather than be seen as voting against them."

While this is true, it is mitigated by the addition of required RFDs since the paper was written. While not perfect, the votes placed must provide a reason for the vote that does prevent some of the worst voting possibilities. It's not perfect, but it (along with other methods) does significantly reduce strictly ideological and friend-based voting.

Okay. :)

Anyways, I think there is a reasonable point to be made, though I don't think it's necessarily the case in the examples above, or often the case with voting in general. It certainly happens, but with a large enough sample I think we can determine that those who win a decent percentage of their debates do so because they are legitimately good debaters and not because of unfair outside influence. Of course, everything in this paper, and everything I have just said is entirely debatable.

If a bias is consistent, then I don't think the sample size makes any difference.

I think the issue is a matter of scale. I don't believe we see widespread voting abuse to the extent that means good debaters making quality arguments are losing a significant enough number of debates because of problematic voting. Yes, members may get an unfair break on a handful of debates when they've done enough debating, but a good debater will win most of the time and the votes and their record will reflect that. This doesn't mean we shouldn't keep working on improving the system, simply that at this point, the stats lean in favor of those who debate well - even if it's not 100% of the time.

For me, the moral is that you have to judge people on their merits. I haven't judged those undefeated on their merits at all, I just made a random comment and I'm sorry if it seems harsh. I was just chatting.

I realize you are just generalizing the issue here without taking into account the people represented by the names above and that's fine. I didn't take any offense and I didn't think your comment was at all harsh. I figured since you expressed interest in the topic that you would appreciate engaging on it, and I appreciate that you have taken the time to engage me on the topic.

I think the general topic of flaws in the voting system is a legitimate topic that we should encourage as much as possible and I hope you will continue to engage me on it for as long as you like. As for the specific issue of voting alliances, I only take issue with that because right now, I haven't seen any evidence that this is actually occurring. If it is, it is a serious issue that would need to be resolved.

I think there are actually better explanations for undefeated debaters if we discount their debating ability from the outset (and I'm doing so for the hypothetical). Members who only take debates as challengers (as opposed to instigators), only take flawed resolutions, and only debate new members, will put the statistical odds of their winning the debate largely in their favor in the long and short term. If one does this for 40 or so debates, it makes it far more likely that they will be undefeated at that point. I don't think that's what any of the above debaters are doing, and I give them credit for their debating ability, but I think that is a more likely explanation for the statistical abnormalities of members who are undefeated after a significant number of debates - at least far more likely than voting manipulation on the scale that would be required in these cases.
Debate.org Moderator
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:34:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.

i have a whole list of potential topics in my sig :D
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:38:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:34:39 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.

i have a whole list of potential topics in my sig :D

You would take Pro on objective morality? I'm kinda curious what argument you'd make for that. I'd be interested in the eugenics one as well. I wouldn't mind fleshing out either of those with you over the weekend when I have more time and seeing if we can come to a mutual resolution.
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 3:49:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:38:12 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:34:39 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.

i have a whole list of potential topics in my sig :D

You would take Pro on objective morality? I'm kinda curious what argument you'd make for that. I'd be interested in the eugenics one as well. I wouldn't mind fleshing out either of those with you over the weekend when I have more time and seeing if we can come to a mutual resolution.

tbh i haven't put much thought into the pro side of the objective morality thing.... i kind of like moral sense theory; the idea that we all have an intrinsic empathy-based moral code that has come about in us as a species via evolution.... i would have to do some more thinking before actually doing a debate on it.
and as for the eugenics one, i'm totally down for that. i already have a few possible contentions prepared in my head.

i also won't be ready to start any new debates for a week or so, especially with this one i'm doing with raisor right now.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 4:29:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:14:51 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
I think the general topic of flaws in the voting system is a legitimate topic that we should encourage as much as possible and I hope you will continue to engage me on it for as long as you like.

I'm good. But thanks!
Blade-of-Truth
Posts: 5,036
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 10:36:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 3:49:22 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:38:12 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:34:39 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.

i have a whole list of potential topics in my sig :D

You would take Pro on objective morality? I'm kinda curious what argument you'd make for that. I'd be interested in the eugenics one as well. I wouldn't mind fleshing out either of those with you over the weekend when I have more time and seeing if we can come to a mutual resolution.

tbh i haven't put much thought into the pro side of the objective morality thing.... i kind of like moral sense theory; the idea that we all have an intrinsic empathy-based moral code that has come about in us as a species via evolution.... i would have to do some more thinking before actually doing a debate on it.

That's a good point and I could see it serving as a foundation to build arguments from. If you happened to run that against me though, I'd simply ask for proof of this code that we supposedly have within us. You'd need to show beyond a shadow of doubt that that code is within us all. The cases I'd bring against you would be psycho and sociopaths who lack such a trait.

and as for the eugenics one, i'm totally down for that. i already have a few possible contentions prepared in my head.

Okay, cool. I've been wanting to run a Eugenics debate for a long time.

i also won't be ready to start any new debates for a week or so, especially with this one i'm doing with raisor right now.

Alright, just give me a heads up when you become free and we'll get this going. My inbox is open for PM's regardless of friend requests. Best of luck against Raisor!
Debate.org Deputy Vote Moderator
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DDO Voting Guide: http://www.debate.org...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Need a judge on your debate? Nominate me! http://www.debate.org...
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2014 10:44:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/3/2014 10:36:32 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:49:22 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:38:12 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:34:39 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:33:37 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:11:33 AM, UchihaMadara wrote:
At 9/3/2014 3:07:14 AM, Blade-of-Truth wrote:

Also, the whole me not instigating thing - it has nothing to do with not wanting BOP. I've taken Pro positions with BOP without instigating the debate. It has to do with me not wanting to give the opponent the last word - and I refuse to do that whole I'm instigator but I make the opponent go first and then "pass" on the last round BS. If you instigate a debate - you should start. I prefer ending though over starting.

i agree. it feels really unnatural.
the problem is that when you want to do a debate where the BOP is clearly on your opponent, and you don't have a specific opponent in mind (so you can't get your opponent to be the instigator), you are pretty much left with no choice but to leave an open debate challenge with the whole pass-last-round set-up.

Do you plan on filling out your big issues at any point? I wouldn't mind debating you either if you ever wanted. Just PM me if you ever have some potential topics. If I'm interested we can get one in.

i have a whole list of potential topics in my sig :D

You would take Pro on objective morality? I'm kinda curious what argument you'd make for that. I'd be interested in the eugenics one as well. I wouldn't mind fleshing out either of those with you over the weekend when I have more time and seeing if we can come to a mutual resolution.

tbh i haven't put much thought into the pro side of the objective morality thing.... i kind of like moral sense theory; the idea that we all have an intrinsic empathy-based moral code that has come about in us as a species via evolution.... i would have to do some more thinking before actually doing a debate on it.

That's a good point and I could see it serving as a foundation to build arguments from. If you happened to run that against me though, I'd simply ask for proof of this code that we supposedly have within us. You'd need to show beyond a shadow of doubt that that code is within us all. The cases I'd bring against you would be psycho and sociopaths who lack such a trait.

yeah, it's a work in progress for sure.


and as for the eugenics one, i'm totally down for that. i already have a few possible contentions prepared in my head.

Okay, cool. I've been wanting to run a Eugenics debate for a long time.

i also won't be ready to start any new debates for a week or so, especially with this one i'm doing with raisor right now.

Alright, just give me a heads up when you become free and we'll get this going. My inbox is open for PM's regardless of friend requests. Best of luck against Raisor!

sounds good.
thanks!