Total Posts:107|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The fundamental reason lower Eloers hate.

vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Aside from the obvious envy, the main reason that low Eloers hate on higher ones that they deem 'unworthy' is simple.

Most people (even some high Eloers) have the notion that the primary objective of debating is to convey your side as more true thant he other in hopes of opening the mind of both yourself and the opponent, and finally the audience.

This is absolutely backwards and incorrect in almost its entirety.

It is actually about honing in the minds of the audience to only the strong points of your side and flaws of your opponent and is about persuasion as opposed to argumentation.

Your opponent's viewpoint and ability to see the 'truth' in the debate is irrelevant. It's only about the audience's view on who is more convincing.
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 9:55:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:53:26 PM, UchihaMadara wrote:
Dude, you've been going at this for hours...

Get a better hobby.

Subjectively better hobbies to you are less enjoyable to me.
UchihaMadara
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 9:59:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:55:47 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:53:26 PM, UchihaMadara wrote:
Dude, you've been going at this for hours...

Get a better hobby.

Subjectively better hobbies to you are less enjoyable to me.

Yeah, trolling is pretty fun, I guess.
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 9:59:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
No one is jealous of STALIN lmao
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:03:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:59:15 PM, thett3 wrote:
No one is jealous of STALIN lmao

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
Aside from the obvious envy, the main reason that low Eloers hate on higher ones that they deem 'unworthy' is simple.

Most people (even some high Eloers) have the notion that the primary objective of debating is to convey your side as more true thant he other in hopes of opening the mind of both yourself and the opponent, and finally the audience.

This is absolutely backwards and incorrect in almost its entirety.

It is actually about honing in the minds of the audience to only the strong points of your side and flaws of your opponent and is about persuasion as opposed to argumentation.

Your opponent's viewpoint and ability to see the 'truth' in the debate is irrelevant. It's only about the audience's view on who is more convincing.

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelivant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

also, i have a decent elo, so i'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because i'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfiets aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly. the fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:04:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:59:15 PM, thett3 wrote:
No one is jealous of STALIN lmao

stalin is GOD lhet me b him
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:05:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:03:42 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:59:15 PM, thett3 wrote:
No one is jealous of STALIN lmao

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.

"Aside from the obvious envy"
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
YYW
Posts: 36,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:05:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM, debatability wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
Aside from the obvious envy, the main reason that low Eloers hate on higher ones that they deem 'unworthy' is simple.

Most people (even some high Eloers) have the notion that the primary objective of debating is to convey your side as more true thant he other in hopes of opening the mind of both yourself and the opponent, and finally the audience.

This is absolutely backwards and incorrect in almost its entirety.

It is actually about honing in the minds of the audience to only the strong points of your side and flaws of your opponent and is about persuasion as opposed to argumentation.

Your opponent's viewpoint and ability to see the 'truth' in the debate is irrelevant. It's only about the audience's view on who is more convincing.

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelivant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

also, i have a decent elo, so i'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because i'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfiets aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly. the fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.

haha such call out.
Tsar of DDO
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:05:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:04:25 PM, debatability wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:59:15 PM, thett3 wrote:
No one is jealous of STALIN lmao

stalin is GOD lhet me b him

You are his multi
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:06:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM, debatability wrote:

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelevant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

False. If the objective is purely to persuade the audience, elo is undeniably the best system out there.

also, i have a decent elo, so I'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because I'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfeits aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly.

No, it is actually punishing the forfeiters by lowering their Elo and is thus good.

The fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.

This is not cheating the system.
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:09:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I speak for most of the people on the site:

OMFG SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:10:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:09:54 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
I speak for most of the people on the site:

OMFG SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please identify the people that you do not speak for so I know who to care about. :)
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:11:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:10:56 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:09:54 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
I speak for most of the people on the site:

OMFG SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please identify the people that you do not speak for so I know who to care about. :)

Eh I'm joshin' ya. I completely agree :)
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:12:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:06:53 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM, debatability wrote:

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelevant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

False. If the objective is purely to persuade the audience, elo is undeniably the best system out there.

also, i have a decent elo, so I'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because I'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfeits aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly.

No, it is actually punishing the forfeiters by lowering their Elo and is thus good.

The fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.

This is not cheating the system.

well obviously you're oblivious. noobs who forfiet generally don't come back. i'll just continue to use stalin because he is the perfect example. stalin OBVIOUSLY convinced the voters with his argumentation given that his opponent doesn't have any. does that mean he deserves 5,000 elo? no

i could accept every marijuana legalization debate that a noob puts up and win 90% of them by simply posting a youtube video with a song about how marijuana makes me happy. obviously, that's awful argumentation. but it wouldn't matter because my hypothetical opponents have provided none. doing this, i could build up a pretty impressive elo that i certianly don't deserve. this is quite literally what people do. i encourage you to compare STALIN to users like YYW and envisage like I said earlier and tell me they deserve the elo lower than stalin's
Daltonian
Posts: 4,797
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:12:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
I am 99869548954% sure you're just a troll, but explain how someone with amazing debating skills/previously left the site comes in a new account with an ELO of 2000, they are less talented than someone who has an elo of 3500 solely by choosing debates that are forfeited or trolled.

The same person behind a 5000 ELO account is suddenly "worse" because they create a new one and default to 2000?

You judge a person by their debating skill.

How can users with lower ELO's tend to often beat users with higher ELO's?

(ex: Roy and anyone with a higher ELO than him)
(ex: Raisor and tons of people)
F _ C K
All I need is "u", baby
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:14:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:12:12 PM, Daltonian wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
I am 99869548954% sure you're just a troll, but explain how someone with amazing debating skills/previously left the site comes in a new account with an ELO of 2000, they are less talented than someone who has an elo of 3500 solely by choosing debates that are forfeited or trolled.

The same person behind a 5000 ELO account is suddenly "worse" because they create a new one and default to 2000?

You judge a person by their debating skill.

How can users with lower ELO's tend to often beat users with higher ELO's?

(ex: Roy and anyone with a higher ELO than him)
(ex: Raisor and tons of people)

If someone chooses to leave and return, they are either breaking the multi-account rules or have requested mods for a fresh start. If the latter is true, then they should be considered a yet-to-be-determined debater. First of all Elo on this website begins at 0 but aside from that, it is safe to assume that they are not worse than the bad debaters and not better than the good ones until they've proven themselves.
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:15:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:06:53 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM, debatability wrote:

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelevant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

False. If the objective is purely to persuade the audience, elo is undeniably the best system out there.

Assertions require justification in order to be valid arguments.

also, i have a decent elo, so I'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because I'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfeits aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly.

No, it is actually punishing the forfeiters by lowering their Elo and is thus good.

How does it punish people who never intended to finish the debate?

Moreover, this makes the assumption that the forfeiters care about elo, thus making it "punishment", but that doesn't really make sense because if they cared about elo they wouldn't forfeit in the first place.

The fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.

This is not cheating the system.

Assertions require justification to be considered valid arguments.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
Daltonian
Posts: 4,797
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:17:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So you're saying someone who wins 40 debates against 40 noob pponents who forfeit every round is a better debater than someone who wins 24 debates against strong opponents and loses 5-6 to the likes of RoyLatham or etc by like, 1 point?

That makes no sense.
F _ C K
All I need is "u", baby
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:18:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:12:01 PM, debatability wrote:

well obviously you're oblivious. noobs who forfeit generally don't come back.

So why should they be left unpunished? This sends a bad message to the remaining debaters that forfeiting is alright as it nullifies Elo loss.

I'll just continue to use stalin because he is the perfect example. stalin OBVIOUSLY convinced the voters with his argumentation given that his opponent doesn't have any. does that mean he deserves 5,000 elo? no

Why does he not deserve it?

i could accept every marijuana legalization debate that a noob puts up and win 90% of them by simply posting a youtube video with a song about how marijuana makes me happy.

Then do it. Stop complaining that you are too lazy to do so.

Obviously, that's awful argumentation. but it wouldn't matter because my hypothetical opponents have provided none.

Your Elo would max out eventually. It can't increase if you keep debating 2k-Elo debaters, you clearly do not understand the mathematics behind it.

Doing this, i could build up a pretty impressive elo that i certainly don't deserve.

Why would you not deserve it?

This is quite literally what people do. i encourage you to compare STALIN to users like YYW and envisage like I said earlier and tell me they deserve the elo lower than stalin's

Well yes, they deserve lower Elo than Stalin due to their laziness.
debatability
Posts: 1,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:19:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:14:55 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:12:12 PM, Daltonian wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
I am 99869548954% sure you're just a troll, but explain how someone with amazing debating skills/previously left the site comes in a new account with an ELO of 2000, they are less talented than someone who has an elo of 3500 solely by choosing debates that are forfeited or trolled.

The same person behind a 5000 ELO account is suddenly "worse" because they create a new one and default to 2000?

You judge a person by their debating skill.

How can users with lower ELO's tend to often beat users with higher ELO's?

(ex: Roy and anyone with a higher ELO than him)
(ex: Raisor and tons of people)

If someone chooses to leave and return, they are either breaking the multi-account rules or have requested mods for a fresh start. If the latter is true, then they should be considered a yet-to-be-determined debater. First of all Elo on this website begins at 0 but aside from that, it is safe to assume that they are not worse than the bad debaters and not better than the good ones until they've proven themselves.

it doesn't take a "5000" elo to prove that you're a better debater than stalin. by ur standards, i would be a better debater than a user like that... even though i could easily kick their @ss
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:20:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:15:55 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:06:53 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:03:48 PM, debatability wrote:

but what does this have to do with high elo'ers vs. low elo'ers? whether the goal of debate is to simply argue or whether the goal is to persuade is totally irrelevant in a discussion pertaining to how valid the elo system is.

False. If the objective is purely to persuade the audience, elo is undeniably the best system out there.

Assertions require justification in order to be valid arguments.

Indeed, and if you assert there to be an equal, or superior, system then you must justify it with valid arguments.

also, i have a decent elo, so I'm not "hating" on other specific users who have undeserved high elos because I'm jealous, rather I convey my distaste because full forfeits aren't real debates and building up an extremely high elo off off low quality garbage such as that is deceptive and silly.

No, it is actually punishing the forfeiters by lowering their Elo and is thus good.

How does it punish people who never intended to finish the debate?

By lowering their Elo.

Moreover, this makes the assumption that the forfeiters care about elo, thus making it "punishment", but that doesn't really make sense because if they cared about elo they wouldn't forfeit in the first place.

The fact that users even have the ability to "cheat the system" in such a way shows that the elo system is flawed.

This is not cheating the system.

Assertions require justification to be considered valid arguments.

If you assert that it is cheating the system, please justify it with valid arguments.
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:21:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
You heard it here first folks, choosing to debate people who are actually going to provide a challenge instead of noobs = lazy.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

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

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

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

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

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

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:21:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:19:07 PM, debatability wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:14:55 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/12/2014 10:12:12 PM, Daltonian wrote:
At 10/12/2014 9:50:51 PM, vwv wrote:
I am 99869548954% sure you're just a troll, but explain how someone with amazing debating skills/previously left the site comes in a new account with an ELO of 2000, they are less talented than someone who has an elo of 3500 solely by choosing debates that are forfeited or trolled.

The same person behind a 5000 ELO account is suddenly "worse" because they create a new one and default to 2000?

You judge a person by their debating skill.

How can users with lower ELO's tend to often beat users with higher ELO's?

(ex: Roy and anyone with a higher ELO than him)
(ex: Raisor and tons of people)

If someone chooses to leave and return, they are either breaking the multi-account rules or have requested mods for a fresh start. If the latter is true, then they should be considered a yet-to-be-determined debater. First of all Elo on this website begins at 0 but aside from that, it is safe to assume that they are not worse than the bad debaters and not better than the good ones until they've proven themselves.

it doesn't take a "5000" elo to prove that you're a better debater than stalin. by ur standards, i would be a better debater than a user like that... even though i could easily kick their @ss

In my opinion your statement is not attacking my argument in any way...
YYW
Posts: 36,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:22:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:21:01 PM, thett3 wrote:
You heard it here first folks, choosing to debate people who are actually going to provide a challenge instead of noobs = lazy.

And claims like that must obviously be refuted, too, because there are most assuredly legitimate agreements on both sides....

roflmao
Tsar of DDO
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2014 10:23:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/12/2014 10:21:01 PM, thett3 wrote:
You heard it here first folks, choosing to debate people who are actually going to provide a challenge instead of noobs = lazy.

If you are to lazy to mass-debate noobs, you will pay the price unless you truly are that caliber of debater who can mass-thwart "skilled" opponents. (I do not deny that Stalin worked out a way to fundamentally avoid this).