Total Posts:58|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

*Presidential Update -- Week 16*

bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 9:39:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Howdy folks!

I'm all back on and, while things aren't entirely back on track, they're certainly on their way there--I can once again devote the amount of time I should to the site. So woohoo for that!

Anyway, this week there isn't much to update on, in part because of how my participation was limited.

So, while this is a "normal" update, it isn't much of one. Next week I'll go back to my normal, long-winded sort of ones, with tips and tricks (if anyone's actually found those useful or good).

What I'd like to do, this week, is get a little more from you folks. How do you think things are going? What would you like to see? And not in terms of updates--though there are plenty of those that could be proposed. I'd like to hear more in terms of what folks would like to see from the sorts of things I can promise, or demonstrate working towards--community building, tournaments, site transparency and the like. The presidency isn't a one-way thing!

Anyway, on a side note, in subsequent weeks I might not post every previous week--it takes a lot of characters to do so. I'm thinking of posting just the previous week's, and thus give a kind of breadcrumb trail if anybody wants to see previous weeks's updates.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Week 1
http://www.debate.org...
Week 2
http://www.debate.org...
Week 3
http://www.debate.org...
Week 4
http://www.debate.org...
Week 5 (labeled as Week 6, apparently I've just noticed, but I dropped it into bsh1's lap because I got called out of town on a moment's notice, so it's not his fault)
http://www.debate.org...
Week 6
http://www.debate.org...
Week 7
http://www.debate.org...
Week 8
http://www.debate.org...
Week 9
http://www.debate.org...
Week 10
http://www.debate.org...
Week 11
http://www.debate.org...
Week 12
http://www.debate.org...
Week 13
http://www.debate.org...
Week 14
http://www.debate.org...
Week 15 (labeled as Week 14, because I suck)
http://www.debate.org...
Week 15.5
http://www.debate.org...
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 9:42:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 9:39:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Howdy folks!

I'm all back on and, while things aren't entirely back on track, they're certainly on their way there--I can once again devote the amount of time I should to the site. So woohoo for that!

Anyway, this week there isn't much to update on, in part because of how my participation was limited.
I had a call-out thread. Contribute when you get time. :P
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:02:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The tips are useful.

@Garbanza - I like the idea. You could maybe reach out to tulle, Danielle, and EsocialBookWorm to see if they were interested in judging such an event.
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...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?
My work here is, finally, done.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:13:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 9:39:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
A crackdown of spam if you can.
Also, an return to balance of using the proper forums.
My work here is, finally, done.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:14:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:02:10 PM, bsh1 wrote:
The tips are useful.

@Garbanza - I like the idea. You could maybe reach out to tulle, Danielle, and EsocialBookWorm to see if they were interested in judging such an event.

thanks.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.
My work here is, finally, done.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:20:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.

Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:29:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:20:14 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.

Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

No, and it doesn't have to be perfect objectivity, but it should be striven for. Your reasons for this tournament is an excuse to not strive for this, and for that I take issue.
But, you are saying that women vote and think a different way than men, which, coming from assumptions I have made about you, is a very surprising thing for you to admit. And, if you are a feminist, a tournament that showcases this difference is evidence that women are not equal to men, because they are different, actually hurts the feminist cause.

If you want to have this tournament, go for it. But, I think your stated reason is horrible.
However, if you are trying to showcase and encourage females to be more involved with the site, that is laudable....I guess. I am not a fan of diversity for diversity's sake.
My work here is, finally, done.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:43:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:29:57 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

No, and it doesn't have to be perfect objectivity, but it should be striven for. Your reasons for this tournament is an excuse to not strive for this, and for that I take issue.

Could you explain your reasoning here? Because you are acknowledging that perfect objectivity is NOT achievable, which means that you agree that everyone's vote will be influenced by her personality and/or experiences.

How is acknowledging that an excuse not to strive for objectivity? For me, it's the opposite. If we acknowledge that everyone has intrinsic bias in particular ways, we can put systems in place to balance it as best we can. Such as having a tournament where only women vote, for example, to balance the usual state of affairs where it's predominantly men voting.

But, you are saying that women vote and think a different way than men, which, coming from assumptions I have made about you, is a very surprising thing for you to admit.

I'm awesomely surprising. ;)

And, if you are a feminist, a tournament that showcases this difference is evidence that women are not equal to men, because they are different, actually hurts the feminist cause.

I can be almost certain that I am not a feminist according to your definition of feminism, but I'm making my own assumptions about YOU in saying that. :)

If you want to have this tournament, go for it. But, I think your stated reason is horrible.
However, if you are trying to showcase and encourage females to be more involved with the site, that is laudable....I guess. I am not a fan of diversity for diversity's sake.

why not? The bigger range of opinions and perspectives the better because it's more challenging. Nobody wants a circle jerk on a debate site.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:47:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:02:10 PM, bsh1 wrote:
The tips are useful.

@Garbanza - I like the idea. You could maybe reach out to tulle, Danielle, and EsocialBookWorm to see if they were interested in judging such an event.

I think I'll wait to see if enough people are interested. It wouldn't work otherwise.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:51:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:20:14 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.

Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

I won't debate that, but it's achievable. I don't have time to figure out a formula for deciding a vote based on perfect objectivity, but it's possible and not that hard. I'd definitely have to get input from several people who've done real debates to create a formula. The debate shouldn't be on if perfect objectivity is achievable, because it most certainly is. Instead it should be on whether perfect objectivity is desirable.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:53:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:51:13 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:20:14 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.

Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

I won't debate that, but it's achievable. I don't have time to figure out a formula for deciding a vote based on perfect objectivity, but it's possible and not that hard. I'd definitely have to get input from several people who've done real debates to create a formula. The debate shouldn't be on if perfect objectivity is achievable, because it most certainly is. Instead it should be on whether perfect objectivity is desirable.

I don't see how it could be since deriving meaning from words is fundamentally subjective and even if you programmed a computer to do it, there would be bias in the decisions made when programming.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 10:57:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:43:10 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:29:57 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

No, and it doesn't have to be perfect objectivity, but it should be striven for. Your reasons for this tournament is an excuse to not strive for this, and for that I take issue.

Could you explain your reasoning here? Because you are acknowledging that perfect objectivity is NOT achievable, which means that you agree that everyone's vote will be influenced by her personality and/or experiences.
I don't agree that ALL votes are, nor do I agree that perfect objectivity cannot exist.

How is acknowledging that an excuse not to strive for objectivity? For me, it's the opposite. If we acknowledge that everyone has intrinsic bias in particular ways, we can put systems in place to balance it as best we can. Such as having a tournament where only women vote, for example, to balance the usual state of affairs where it's predominantly men voting.
You aren't balancing anything. You said arguments need to be changed.
So, a logical argument is not enough to sway a female's mind? Or is it the logical arguments are missing and female's demand said missing logic?

But, you are saying that women vote and think a different way than men, which, coming from assumptions I have made about you, is a very surprising thing for you to admit.

I'm awesomely surprising. ;)

And, if you are a feminist, a tournament that showcases this difference is evidence that women are not equal to men, because they are different, actually hurts the feminist cause.

I can be almost certain that I am not a feminist according to your definition of feminism, but I'm making my own assumptions about YOU in saying that. :)
Perhaps. My view of feminism is that women are equal to men - period.
My view on feminism is that woman are not equal to men, but should be treated as equal, in the circumstances where they are equal.

If you want to have this tournament, go for it. But, I think your stated reason is horrible.
However, if you are trying to showcase and encourage females to be more involved with the site, that is laudable....I guess. I am not a fan of diversity for diversity's sake.

why not? The bigger range of opinions and perspectives the better because it's more challenging. Nobody wants a circle jerk on a debate site.

Differing perspectives and opinions is imperative for a debate site.
However, that isn't diversity for diversity's sake, is it?
My work here is, finally, done.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 11:02:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:53:12 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:51:13 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:20:14 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:17:06 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:38 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:10:25 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

Are you implying that women vote differently than men?
Are you further saying that judges should be using their perspectives while voting on a debate? Aren't they supposed to be unbias?

Nobody's unbiased. "Bias" is a loaded word, but everyone interprets meaning from words in particular ways, at the most basic level. The exact meaning you derive from phrases and words will depend on your experiences.

And a judge should be doing their best to leave their bias at the door.
The fact that you specifically stated that debaters would need to utilize different arguments is a slap in the face of objectivity that this site is supposed to adhere to, and frankly, a slap in the face to feminism.

Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

I won't debate that, but it's achievable. I don't have time to figure out a formula for deciding a vote based on perfect objectivity, but it's possible and not that hard. I'd definitely have to get input from several people who've done real debates to create a formula. The debate shouldn't be on if perfect objectivity is achievable, because it most certainly is. Instead it should be on whether perfect objectivity is desirable.

I don't see how it could be since deriving meaning from words is fundamentally subjective and even if you programmed a computer to do it, there would be bias in the decisions made when programming.

I could derive premises and conclusions from your arguments, which I could plug into some already existing logical systems. The first thing is to see if both you and your opponent's arguments are logically valid. Then you can analyze their rebuttals as well as yours using the same system of logic to see if based on the evidence provided the arguments are logically sound.

After all the data is plugged in you can see how the dust settles. The system wouldn't know how to determine the impacts of all the arguments so a lot of debates would end in ties, but probably not most of them. Another problem is that debates aren't purely or even mainly an exercise in logic.

So I definitely think that you could come up with an objective system for determining the outcome of debates, so the real question is.... Is a system for objectively determining the outcome of debates desirable?
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 11:04:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:57:30 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:43:10 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:29:57 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
Do you want to debate it? The resolution could be

Perfect objectivity is achievable in voting on debates.

No, and it doesn't have to be perfect objectivity, but it should be striven for. Your reasons for this tournament is an excuse to not strive for this, and for that I take issue.

Could you explain your reasoning here? Because you are acknowledging that perfect objectivity is NOT achievable, which means that you agree that everyone's vote will be influenced by her personality and/or experiences.
I don't agree that ALL votes are, nor do I agree that perfect objectivity cannot exist.

okay, you believe what you believe but you won't defend it in a debate on a debate site. Fair enough.

I suppose it was more just being negative about my idea so I'd feel bad.

How is acknowledging that an excuse not to strive for objectivity? For me, it's the opposite. If we acknowledge that everyone has intrinsic bias in particular ways, we can put systems in place to balance it as best we can. Such as having a tournament where only women vote, for example, to balance the usual state of affairs where it's predominantly men voting.
You aren't balancing anything. You said arguments need to be changed.
So, a logical argument is not enough to sway a female's mind? Or is it the logical arguments are missing and female's demand said missing logic?

Debates aren't pure logic, or the ones that I've seen aren't. If they were, we'd be writing in symbols.

But, you are saying that women vote and think a different way than men, which, coming from assumptions I have made about you, is a very surprising thing for you to admit.

I'm awesomely surprising. ;)

And, if you are a feminist, a tournament that showcases this difference is evidence that women are not equal to men, because they are different, actually hurts the feminist cause.

I can be almost certain that I am not a feminist according to your definition of feminism, but I'm making my own assumptions about YOU in saying that. :)
Perhaps. My view of feminism is that women are equal to men - period.
My view on feminism is that woman are not equal to men, but should be treated as equal, in the circumstances where they are equal.

If you want to have this tournament, go for it. But, I think your stated reason is horrible.
However, if you are trying to showcase and encourage females to be more involved with the site, that is laudable....I guess. I am not a fan of diversity for diversity's sake.

why not? The bigger range of opinions and perspectives the better because it's more challenging. Nobody wants a circle jerk on a debate site.

Differing perspectives and opinions is imperative for a debate site.
However, that isn't diversity for diversity's sake, is it?

I'd ask you what you meant, but we've probably derailed bladerunner's thread enough with this.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/4/2014 11:06:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 11:02:13 PM, Wylted wrote:

Well yeah, I agree that the desirable question is the more interesting one.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 9:34:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 9:42:14 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:39:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Howdy folks!

I'm all back on and, while things aren't entirely back on track, they're certainly on their way there--I can once again devote the amount of time I should to the site. So woohoo for that!

Anyway, this week there isn't much to update on, in part because of how my participation was limited.
I had a call-out thread. Contribute when you get time. :P

Will do. I've been thinking about it--both yours and the other one. Everything I've thought of saying has felt awkward.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 9:43:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:13:59 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:39:52 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
A crackdown of spam if you can.

Can you be more specific? If you mean the spambots who post a gajilion forum posts and then have their accounts closed, it's a sort of tough thing--any system that would help keep them out is 1, going to be coded into the site (and thus, Juggle-dependent), and 2, going to be a barrier to "real" new members joining. User and spam security are a delicate balancing act.

Also, an return to balance of using the proper forums.

That's one I'd really like to work on--but it's a cultural thing. I've tried a few means of "soft touch" changes that haven't panned out the greatest, and am brainstorming some more ideas, because the alternative is airmax having to do something about it, and that's both heavy-handed and relatively low on his list of priorities ATM.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 9:44:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 10:57:30 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Differing perspectives and opinions is imperative for a debate site.
However, that isn't diversity for diversity's sake, is it?

Can you clarify this statement in the context of your previous one that first gave the "diversity for diversity's sake" line?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 10:02:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

I have some concerns which might be similar to Khaos's--though I suspect that our rationale is quite different.

I like the notion, and the intent. I'm largely concerned about such an explicit acknowledgement of a difference in scoring. From an experience standpoint, OF COURSE every judge, regardless of their gender, approaches things differently. I mean, I LOVE whiteflame's votes, despite the fact that on multiple occasions we have assessed a debate very differently. I think we both put our biases down at the door, as it were, concerning the resolution, and yet there are subjective elements that just ARE scored differently. My favorite part is that, though I may disagree with him, I understand his votes. Opinions, as they say, vary. But in theory, we're supposed to be dispassionate robots as much as possible and having all-women scoring in the way you're suggesting seems to repudiate that intent--a nigh-unachievable goal, but one I'm hesitant to repudiate, if that makes sense. On a so-called "normal" debate, explicitly acknowledging your bias's (or perspective, or however you want to phrase it) impact on your vote is likely to get you called out as a votebomber--here, it's a selling point, and that concerns me.

That said, I like the notion of a tournament that, in one way or another, brings a focus to groups other than the majority.

And as I'm writing this I'm wondering if my objection couldn't be overcome--I mean, we do do "nonstandard" types of scoring and debates, so I don't think it's an insurmountable objection.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 10:04:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/4/2014 11:04:49 PM, Garbanza wrote:

I'd ask you what you meant, but we've probably derailed bladerunner's thread enough with this.

Well, as I said 2 weeks ago, time place and manner matter. In this case, this "derailment" was quite organic and began as a point which was quite relevant, and I in no way find it objectionable (not that I even own a thread anyway, regardless of whether I create it, though I appreciate the sentiment).
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 10:41:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 10:02:30 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

I have some concerns which might be similar to Khaos's--though I suspect that our rationale is quite different.

I like the notion, and the intent. I'm largely concerned about such an explicit acknowledgement of a difference in scoring. From an experience standpoint, OF COURSE every judge, regardless of their gender, approaches things differently. I mean, I LOVE whiteflame's votes, despite the fact that on multiple occasions we have assessed a debate very differently. I think we both put our biases down at the door, as it were, concerning the resolution, and yet there are subjective elements that just ARE scored differently. My favorite part is that, though I may disagree with him, I understand his votes. Opinions, as they say, vary. But in theory, we're supposed to be dispassionate robots as much as possible and having all-women scoring in the way you're suggesting seems to repudiate that intent--a nigh-unachievable goal, but one I'm hesitant to repudiate, if that makes sense. On a so-called "normal" debate, explicitly acknowledging your bias's (or perspective, or however you want to phrase it) impact on your vote is likely to get you called out as a votebomber--here, it's a selling point, and that concerns me.

That said, I like the notion of a tournament that, in one way or another, brings a focus to groups other than the majority.

And as I'm writing this I'm wondering if my objection couldn't be overcome--I mean, we do do "nonstandard" types of scoring and debates, so I don't think it's an insurmountable objection.

I see what you mean. Even though I disagree with this idea of objective voting - not only that it's achievable, but even that you can say some votes are more objective than others in any kind of absolute way. Or even, as wylted said, that objective voting is desirable - I don't think it is either. But you're right that the purpose of the tournament would not be to challenge this widespread idea about objective voting and it could be a problem.

How about this. The tournament should be based on how many votes you get from women. So if one debate was won 6 votes to 3, say, both competitors would be ahead of another two on a debate that was won 2-0. That way, the debaters would have to come up with topics of interest to women as well as win the debates. That would be better in terms of encouraging women to the site because it would mean people would have to come up with women-friendly topics.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 10:47:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 10:41:46 PM, Garbanza wrote:
At 10/5/2014 10:02:30 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

I have some concerns which might be similar to Khaos's--though I suspect that our rationale is quite different.

I like the notion, and the intent. I'm largely concerned about such an explicit acknowledgement of a difference in scoring. From an experience standpoint, OF COURSE every judge, regardless of their gender, approaches things differently. I mean, I LOVE whiteflame's votes, despite the fact that on multiple occasions we have assessed a debate very differently. I think we both put our biases down at the door, as it were, concerning the resolution, and yet there are subjective elements that just ARE scored differently. My favorite part is that, though I may disagree with him, I understand his votes. Opinions, as they say, vary. But in theory, we're supposed to be dispassionate robots as much as possible and having all-women scoring in the way you're suggesting seems to repudiate that intent--a nigh-unachievable goal, but one I'm hesitant to repudiate, if that makes sense. On a so-called "normal" debate, explicitly acknowledging your bias's (or perspective, or however you want to phrase it) impact on your vote is likely to get you called out as a votebomber--here, it's a selling point, and that concerns me.

That said, I like the notion of a tournament that, in one way or another, brings a focus to groups other than the majority.

And as I'm writing this I'm wondering if my objection couldn't be overcome--I mean, we do do "nonstandard" types of scoring and debates, so I don't think it's an insurmountable objection.

I see what you mean. Even though I disagree with this idea of objective voting - not only that it's achievable, but even that you can say some votes are more objective than others in any kind of absolute way. Or even, as wylted said, that objective voting is desirable - I don't think it is either. But you're right that the purpose of the tournament would not be to challenge this widespread idea about objective voting and it could be a problem.

How about this. The tournament should be based on how many votes you get from women. So if one debate was won 6 votes to 3, say, both competitors would be ahead of another two on a debate that was won 2-0. That way, the debaters would have to come up with topics of interest to women as well as win the debates. That would be better in terms of encouraging women to the site because it would mean people would have to come up with women-friendly topics.

Hmmm, I worry somewhat about that, but I think I like it!
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 10:57:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 10:47:33 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:

Hmmm, I worry somewhat about that, but I think I like it!

Yay! I'll just have to think of a good name for the tournament.
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/5/2014 11:26:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 9:43:18 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:13:59 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
A crackdown of spam if you can.
Can you be more specific? If you mean the spambots who post a gajilion forum posts and then have their accounts closed, it's a sort of tough thing--any system that would help keep them out is 1, going to be coded into the site (and thus, Juggle-dependent), and 2, going to be a barrier to "real" new members joining. User and spam security are a delicate balancing act.
Well-maintained forums (free from spambot spam) should be weighted more than the ease of creating an account even from the goal of getting new members to join; forums which offer interesting legitimate topics of discussion are more appealing than forums littered with spam even if you have to enter a captcha to join. I think you should ask Juggle to look into options to limit forum spam; there were some points where it seemed some (low traffic) forum sections were more spam than actual threads.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/6/2014 6:22:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 10:02:30 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 10/4/2014 9:45:50 PM, Garbanza wrote:
I have an idea for encouraging the participation of women on this site - a tournament that is judged only by women. Anyone can participate, but only women can judge. By women, I mean actual women. I'm not sure if there would be enough, but the idea is that women's perspectives would need to be anticipated when presenting arguments, which is the opposite of how it is at the moment when approaching 100% of voters are male.

What do you think?

I have some concerns which might be similar to Khaos's--though I suspect that our rationale is quite different.

I like the notion, and the intent. I'm largely concerned about such an explicit acknowledgement of a difference in scoring.

Isn't this what I said, in part?
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/6/2014 6:39:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/5/2014 9:44:28 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 10/4/2014 10:57:30 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:

Differing perspectives and opinions is imperative for a debate site.
However, that isn't diversity for diversity's sake, is it?

Can you clarify this statement in the context of your previous one that first gave the "diversity for diversity's sake" line?

Women may very well be underrepresented on DDO, but it doesn't necessarily mean their views or opinions are not represented. Assuming they are, there is no reason for diversity for diversity's sake.

Let me try to illustrate this with a hypothetical:
1. A group of 10 white men, who come from different parts of the country and have different backgrounds
2. A group of 10 individuals who, at first glance, would represent different diversity given different races and genders, but all grew up in the Hamptons and went to Harvard.

Which represent diversity better?
1 is actual diversity of thoughts, which is what a debate website cares about.
2 is a shallow appearance of diversity with no true diversity

In regards to this tourney, first and foremost, there is no reason why girls should be voting differently than boys, and if they do, this is not something that should be showcased. However, the underlying concern is not necessarily addressed by this tourney, as more women may just chime the same tune as others currently, thus there is no additional diversity, except in the fact there are more women.

Given this is a debate tournament, this difference should not be noticable, and if it is, it is troubling. As I said, if the goal is to get more women here for their perspectives, a debate tourney is not the way to do it. A forum posting or something like that, where opinions should be considered and actually matter, that is where the idea needs to bear fruit.
My work here is, finally, done.