Total Posts:54|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

--- How to use the Report button. ---

Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Been getting requests for me to report stuff for people, so educational post...

1. Click "Report" (may be titled "Report this...").
2. Click any reasons on the pop-up.
3. Fill in the optional comments if desired (spam will be deleted either way, a vote you disagree with likely needs you to point out why it's invalid).
4. Click the "Send Report" button.

If you are hoping a whole thread or debate be deleted, ensure you click the top level report button ("Report this Debate" / "Report"), not the lower level "Report this Argument" and "Report this Post."

Plenty of things that are not worthy of being deleted, are still worthy of being reported. This is to establish a trending pattern on a user. For example, if user X systematically votes in user Y's favor with 4-5 points on every one of their debates, the individual votes may still be valid (doubtful), but the trend is indicative of something bad (which may result in both their votes being deleted along with their voting privileges.

In the case of FF debates, it's not worth reporting bad votes, because of how massively one sided it is anyway. However even then, people should only award conduct over "FF." Sure the sources are unchallenged, but on an FF are you even skimming those links one side provided? Personally, I see half the arguments in red, I have no need to weight the case properly and just award conduct with "FF" as the RFD.

Which bridges to a point about the most common place I see people ruin otherwise good votes. "Had sources" is not enough RFD to award sources. Vaguely knowing someone had sources, does not suggest you so much as glanced at their content (lazy debaters, often use sources which are actually against their own case). "Had sources" is no better than "had arguments" or "had conduct."

Margins of victory in each vote category are another important role. Almost any reason for argument points that suggests the voter read the case (as opposed to being told about it, or a deep sexual longing for either debater) are valid. All other categories need a large margin of victory to be warranted. Sure one side wrote "there" when they should have wrote "their," but that did not distract from their case, a small honest mistake should be forgiven. Preferring one case to the other, is not enough warrant for conduct; nor is them "being wrong."

Any questions?
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...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:49:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
. . . nor is them "being wrong.
I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.
Your statement is strong evidence that you should not award points on anything other than a FF.
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...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:52:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 2:49:27 PM, Ragnar wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
. . . nor is them "being wrong.
I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.
Your statement is strong evidence that you should not award points on anything other than a FF.

I could say the same for your statement. Do you really think that a person should be awarded a win on lies and/ or false information?
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:52:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

so you just vb people? Cool. :p
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:54:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

Your concept of truth and falsehood falls in line with our human prejudice. You should literally be a blank state when voting on debates. Whether his responses seem to be false to you doesn't matter, it is the role of his opponent to expose such responses, not you, and if he doesn't do so adequately, he loses.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:55:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 2:52:31 PM, headphonegut wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

so you just vb people? Cool. :p

Not quite. When I see someone who has falsehoods in their arguments, I tend not to vote in that debate at all - Unless I can point out where their opponent has it right.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 2:56:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 2:54:07 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

Your concept of truth and falsehood falls in line with our human prejudice. You should literally be a blank state when voting on debates. Whether his responses seem to be false to you doesn't matter, it is the role of his opponent to expose such responses, not you, and if he doesn't do so adequately, he loses.

Right. See my comments in #7
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:05:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 2:56:26 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 2:54:07 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

Your concept of truth and falsehood falls in line with our human prejudice. You should literally be a blank state when voting on debates. Whether his responses seem to be false to you doesn't matter, it is the role of his opponent to expose such responses, not you, and if he doesn't do so adequately, he loses.

Right. See my comments in #7

Your comment in #7 raises a suspicion that you vote only when your prejudice is pervading, which sounds like something that harms the integrity of voting on this website as opposed to strengthening it. instead of being concerned with your own beliefs being defended and awarded, you should award the better debate in terms of voting, regardless if he totally disagrees with you and has a completely different outlook on things, meanwhile punishing those who are in agreement with you but not offering adequate justifications for their position. If you don't do that, they you are simply trading off integrity with agenda, and wanting to see your ideas awarded, and not willing to encourage proper debating and honest judgment.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:19:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:05:55 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 2:56:26 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 2:54:07 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

Your concept of truth and falsehood falls in line with our human prejudice. You should literally be a blank state when voting on debates. Whether his responses seem to be false to you doesn't matter, it is the role of his opponent to expose such responses, not you, and if he doesn't do so adequately, he loses.

Right. See my comments in #7

Your comment in #7 raises a suspicion that you vote only when your prejudice is pervading, which sounds like something that harms the integrity of voting on this website as opposed to strengthening it. instead of being concerned with your own beliefs being defended and awarded, you should award the better debate in terms of voting, regardless if he totally disagrees with you and has a completely different outlook on things, meanwhile punishing those who are in agreement with you but not offering adequate justifications for their position. If you don't do that, they you are simply trading off integrity with agenda, and wanting to see your ideas awarded, and not willing to encourage proper debating and honest judgment.

That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

"There is an objective winner in chess because they (there) are no judges. Chess is an objective win and loss because there is an objective way to win, you have an objective. Debate is not the same way. Your objective way to win a debate is persuade the voters, but the voters will always judge based on their perception which is subjective. Meaning there is no way to objectively say who wins a debate or not." - Mikal

http://www.debate.org...
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:23:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is no fully objective way to judge anything. However, that doesn't mean that some careful and reasonable subjective judgments that start from a blank state are as reasonable as simply voting to those who you agree with. That's surrendering to total prejudice.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:24:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...

Do point out the votes where you obviously voted AGAINST your own personal views and or agenda.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:30:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:24:50 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...

Do point out the votes where you obviously voted AGAINST your own personal views and or agenda.

I have no time and energy to list them all. But here is an example:

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

I voted for Pro when I was inclined to agree with Con's position. I was also the only voter on this debate.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:34:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:30:25 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:24:50 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...

Do point out the votes where you obviously voted AGAINST your own personal views and or agenda.

I have no time and energy to list them all. But here is an example:

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

I voted for Pro when I was inclined to agree with Con's position. I was also the only voter on this debate.

Your claim is not supported by your indication in your vote. If you were inclined to agree with Con "before the debate" why did you indicate that you were "tied" or split on the subject?
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:41:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:34:30 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:30:25 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:24:50 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...

Do point out the votes where you obviously voted AGAINST your own personal views and or agenda.

I have no time and energy to list them all. But here is an example:

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

I voted for Pro when I was inclined to agree with Con's position. I was also the only voter on this debate.

Your claim is not supported by your indication in your vote. If you were inclined to agree with Con "before the debate" why did you indicate that you were "tied" or split on the subject?

Because I was only inclined to one side, not really in full agreement with. I'm rarely in full agreement with any side.

But take in consideration that as an ex-Druze i was extensively taught Shiah islam, and so in this debate Con's position could even be something that I could have taken and properly defended, as opposed to Pro's Sunni claim, but since I"m agnostic, I was never in full agreement with any, but with an inclination to the Shiah claim.
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:45:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:41:43 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:34:30 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:30:25 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:24:50 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:21:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That's an interesting analysis. Get back to me when you actually have a voting record of your own. What your thoughts are on this (seemingly) competing analysis?

Don't mistaken me for a new user. I have a record of 111 votes on my previous account. I simply lost the password. http://www.debate.org...

Do point out the votes where you obviously voted AGAINST your own personal views and or agenda.

I have no time and energy to list them all. But here is an example:

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

I voted for Pro when I was inclined to agree with Con's position. I was also the only voter on this debate.

Your claim is not supported by your indication in your vote. If you were inclined to agree with Con "before the debate" why did you indicate that you were "tied" or split on the subject?

Because I was only inclined to one side, not really in full agreement with. I'm rarely in full agreement with any side.

But take in consideration that as an ex-Druze i was extensively taught Shiah islam, and so in this debate Con's position could even be something that I could have taken and properly defended, as opposed to Pro's Sunni claim, but since I"m agnostic, I was never in full agreement with any, but with an inclination to the Shiah claim.

As you are an agnostic then, you didn't actually vote against any actual beliefs at all then. Did you.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:47:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.

I asked you for proof of where you actually voted against your own beliefs or agenda.

You provided a vote where you claim to have voted against an "inclination" instead.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:49:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As you are an agnostic then, you didn't actually vote against any actual beliefs at all then. Did you.

I haven't yet seen a debate on agnosticism, except one I myself took, but if I had, and the agnostic had a poor performance, my vote wouldn't go his way. That's for sure. And since I don't have any strong beliefs, I find it impossible for me to vote against my strong beliefs, as I have none. No?
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:50:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:47:45 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.

I asked you for proof of where you actually voted against your own beliefs or agenda.

You provided a vote where you claim to have voted against an "inclination" instead.

I doubt I have any strong beliefs as opposed to inclinations.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:55:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:50:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:47:45 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.

I asked you for proof of where you actually voted against your own beliefs or agenda.

You provided a vote where you claim to have voted against an "inclination" instead.

I doubt I have any strong beliefs as opposed to inclinations.

"Strong" is a matter of opinion. Your voting record (from your previous account) will likely show where your interest and strongest beliefs are - despite your claims that you start every vote with a "blank state."
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 3:59:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:55:31 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:50:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:47:45 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.

I asked you for proof of where you actually voted against your own beliefs or agenda.

You provided a vote where you claim to have voted against an "inclination" instead.

I doubt I have any strong beliefs as opposed to inclinations.

"Strong" is a matter of opinion. Your voting record (from your previous account) will likely show where your interest and strongest beliefs are - despite your claims that you start every vote with a "blank state."

Please tell me what my strong beliefs are then. Even in the debates I take about Islam, I'm not entirely convinced of my position, but inclined to it, and so I take debates that defend Islam and others that critique it, sometimes contradicting myself from debate to another.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:05:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 3:59:23 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:55:31 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:50:09 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:47:45 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 3:43:15 PM, Roukezian wrote:
That is to say, the vote thing asks you "Agreed with before the debate" as opposed to "With an inclination to agree with before the debate." If it asked the second question, many of my answers would have been very different.

I asked you for proof of where you actually voted against your own beliefs or agenda.

You provided a vote where you claim to have voted against an "inclination" instead.

I doubt I have any strong beliefs as opposed to inclinations.

"Strong" is a matter of opinion. Your voting record (from your previous account) will likely show where your interest and strongest beliefs are - despite your claims that you start every vote with a "blank state."

Please tell me what my strong beliefs are then. Even in the debates I take about Islam, I'm not entirely convinced of my position, but inclined to it, and so I take debates that defend Islam and others that critique it, sometimes contradicting myself from debate to another.

Ummm. I just said that "strong" is a matter of opinion. It's subjective. You claimed to be a blank slate and that you will even vote against your own inclinations. Fine.

Your voting record should reflect that.

However, even without doing the work, I know that an analysis of your votes and forum posts will show more of an agenda, preference and bias than you are willing to admit to.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:09:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
However, even without doing the work, I know that an analysis of your votes and forum posts will show more of an agenda, preference and bias than you are willing to admit to.

Perhaps because I'm imperfect and with a room for improvement, but that doesn't at all touch upon whether it is as reasonable to surrender to bias when you could at least hold considerable integrity as a voter and maintain the voting integrity which this website is built upon. I don't expect myself to be flawless. Yet I stand against anyone who promotes flawed-voting as a paradigm.
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:35:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 4:09:28 PM, Roukezian wrote:
However, even without doing the work, I know that an analysis of your votes and forum posts will show more of an agenda, preference and bias than you are willing to admit to.

Perhaps because I'm imperfect and with a room for improvement, but that doesn't at all touch upon whether it is as reasonable to surrender to bias when you could at least hold considerable integrity as a voter and maintain the voting integrity which this website is built upon. I don't expect myself to be flawless. Yet I stand against anyone who promotes flawed-voting as a paradigm.

Whether your bias is embraced or whether you are in denial of it, the end results are the same (see My and Mikal's observations). Human beings are not capable of objectively judging debates - to make the elo's as objective here on DDO as they would be for chess players. You seem to think that I have "surrendered" to any bias I have and that's just not the case. I do as much to keep my own bias in check as you do or anyone else does.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:47:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 4:35:55 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 4:09:28 PM, Roukezian wrote:
However, even without doing the work, I know that an analysis of your votes and forum posts will show more of an agenda, preference and bias than you are willing to admit to.

Perhaps because I'm imperfect and with a room for improvement, but that doesn't at all touch upon whether it is as reasonable to surrender to bias when you could at least hold considerable integrity as a voter and maintain the voting integrity which this website is built upon. I don't expect myself to be flawless. Yet I stand against anyone who promotes flawed-voting as a paradigm.

Whether your bias is embraced or whether you are in denial of it, the end results are the same (see My and Mikal's observations). Human beings are not capable of objectively judging debates - to make the elo's as objective here on DDO as they would be for chess players. You seem to think that I have "surrendered" to any bias I have and that's just not the case. I do as much to keep my own bias in check as you do or anyone else does.

Mikal doesn't make your own conclusion, and so quoting his observation is irrelevant. He was just remarking on how voting is never fully objective, yet he never claimed that we shouldn't try to be as objective as possible.

If person A usually votes only to those who he agrees with(which you confessed), while person B doesn't but could suffer some bias here and there, yet remains to vote even to those he is not inclined to agree with, it is indubitably the latter which contributes more to the voting integrity of the website. I would like a response to this particle point, and not a response that muddies the waters and falsely equivocates between two different things. The first being voting only based on your agenda, and the second being awarding even your dissenters if they show better debate performance, although you won't do that always perfectly, but you could do that reasonably well by fighting off your prejudice.
Roukezian
Posts: 1,711
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:55:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In short, our lack of full-fledged objectivity as humans is an incentive to be as objective as possible. It is obvious that we can considerably overcome our prejudice, even if not fully.
RainbowDash52
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/24/2014 4:57:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/24/2014 2:54:07 PM, Roukezian wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:36:27 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/24/2014 1:26:24 PM, Ragnar wrote:
". . . nor is them "being wrong."


I have to disagree with you on that. I will not award someone a win on arguments if I know their claims are false. No matter how well presented their arguments are, I am more 'convinced' by a poorly worded truth than I am by a cleverly crafted falsehood.

Your concept of truth and falsehood falls in line with our human prejudice. You should literally be a blank state when voting on debates. Whether his responses seem to be false to you doesn't matter, it is the role of his opponent to expose such responses, not you, and if he doesn't do so adequately, he loses.

But the problem is that it is literally impossible to completely start from a blank state.