Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

It'sa me, Airmax... sayin some stuff

airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey DDO!

How's it goin?

I hope you are all well and having a great start to your February.

So some stuff has happened and I'd like to give a brief update, reiterate some general rules, and advance some discussion where it's needed.

Voting stuff

1) DK and Emil's debate

Every vote on that debate is still under review and the results of it are still pending. I've already spent hours on it and I will get back to it as soon as I can. There are naturally some complications with last second votes, counter votes, vote lobbying, pending RFD votes, and other things as well as some poor votes that are likely to be deleted soon. All I can say now is that I'm aware of all the issues and I'm working on it.

2) Counter voting.

Counter voting is not allowed. We can certainly have a discussion about whether or not it should be, and that's perfectly fine. But at the moment it isn't, and I know that most are aware of this.

If we'd like to have a system where members can counter whatever they like because they don't like a vote - then fine, let's have that discussion and no longer have counter votes be against the rules. I'm happy to engage in that discussion. But that isn't the case right now, so counter votes need to stop. They don't assist in making voting fair, they only make it so that 2 votes need deletion instead of one. If you have a problem with a vote you can report it, and that's it. In most cases those votes are deleted in a reasonable amount of time.

I want to make this absolutely clear because it's an issue that isn't related to just the past week. Counter voting is not allowed, and those who engage in it will lose their voting privileges for an extended period of time. If a member thinks a vote is so clearly terrible that it deserves a counter, then it's likely that an objective 3rd party (the moderator) will as well, and the right thing can take place whereby that vote is deleted.

If we want to change this, and go back to the days of counter voting, I'm happy to engage in that discussion, but until further notice it still is not allowed.

3) "Pending RFDs"

I don't believe any actual discussion has taken place on this so I'd like to hear thoughts on it and we can come up with a reasonable policy for it. In the meantime "Pending RFDs" are not allowed.

A voter must place his vote and within a reasonable amount of time actually include the RFD. This means within an hour or so. If the debate is within an hour of the voting period ending, then the RFD must be placed with 10 minutes. Write your RFD and then vote.

I have deleted plenty of votes that say "RFD coming soon" or some equivalent, and then looked a few days later and not seen an RFD. There's really no justification for this. I understand that members may want to vote and then place an RFD later, but part of voting is writing up an RFD and the two can not be separated.

I hope we can have a lengthy discussion on this so that we can come up with something that is fair and reasonable. But at the moment, I think it's important that we insist on having RFDs placed within a reasonable amount of time as described above.

4) Vote lobbying

There's no rules against contacting people and asking them to vote. If there should be, let's have that discussion, but right now there isn't, and I don't think the simple act of asking people to vote should be against the rules. Naturally there's a fine line between what I think we are all ok with, and what can be viewed as less ethical and it's necessary to determine what we are all comfortable with, and what we aren't.

What I do have a serious problem with is offering prid pro quo for votes, and if it can be proven someone is doing such a thing to manipulate the results of any debate, then there are consequences for that. I don't think any explicit rule has ever been made about this, but negatively threatening the integrity of debates in any way has always been implicitly against the rules.

I'm not jumping to any conclusions about who has done what regarding these types of things, and as always I will be thorough in investigating these types of issues, but I want to make it clear that bribing people to vote in a particular way is not allowed.

Other stuff

1) Ban/trial threads

Making a thread asking for a member to be banned or put on trial is against the rules. It falls under the policy against making member attack threads. If you have an issue with a member, contact a moderator.

2) Threats of moderator action

This is against the rules. If something is worth reporting, report it. That is the extent to what you are allowed to do. Saying "I'm going to tell Airmax or the moderator on you" is not allowed, nor is replying to a post with "Reported". If something actually is worth reporting, contact me or simply use the report function. Members need to refrain from making threats like this. It's rarely productive and often just escalates whatever problem is occurring at the moment.

(Inb4 'reported')

...

So that's it for now. The above are the issues I wanted to address and I'm happy to discuss any of them. If you have any questions please ask.
Debate.org Moderator
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:45:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Love you, airmax. Let's do some live mafia some time this weekend.
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Zaradi
Posts: 14,124
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:45:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
2) Threats of moderator action


Reported.

Oops....

inb4 I get banned.

Wait...that's not any better....

inb4 banhammer...
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:46:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:45:05 PM, Maikuru wrote:
Love you, airmax. Let's do some live mafia some time this weekend.

Sounds like a plan... I should have some time on Saturday evening.
Debate.org Moderator
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:48:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If votes can be deleted at any time, and as such, debate wins overturned at any time, I see no reason why an RFD cannot be delayed. We have seen some RFDs that are thousands of characters, and I see no reason why a vote cannot be cast, to ensure the correct debater is the victor, and write the RFD when the voter has time.

I would say the RFD must be made within one week, or the vote is deleted.
There is no reason why the debaters, in a heated contest where they are monitoring RFDs, would "forget" to ensure the RFD comes. If it does not, the vote is reported, and subsequently deleted.
Simple as that.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:50:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:46:03 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:45:05 PM, Maikuru wrote:
Love you, airmax. Let's do some live mafia some time this weekend.

Sounds like a plan... I should have some time on Saturday evening.

Perf
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:53:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
Hey DDO!

How's it goin?

I hope you are all well and having a great start to your February.

So some stuff has happened and I'd like to give a brief update, reiterate some general rules, and advance some discussion where it's needed.

Voting stuff

1) DK and Emil's debate

Every vote on that debate is still under review and the results of it are still pending. I've already spent hours on it and I will get back to it as soon as I can. There are naturally some complications with last second votes, counter votes, vote lobbying, pending RFD votes, and other things as well as some poor votes that are likely to be deleted soon. All I can say now is that I'm aware of all the issues and I'm working on it.

2) Counter voting.

Counter voting is not allowed. We can certainly have a discussion about whether or not it should be, and that's perfectly fine. But at the moment it isn't, and I know that most are aware of this.

If we'd like to have a system where members can counter whatever they like because they don't like a vote - then fine, let's have that discussion and no longer have counter votes be against the rules. I'm happy to engage in that discussion. But that isn't the case right now, so counter votes need to stop. They don't assist in making voting fair, they only make it so that 2 votes need deletion instead of one. If you have a problem with a vote you can report it, and that's it. In most cases those votes are deleted in a reasonable amount of time.

I want to make this absolutely clear because it's an issue that isn't related to just the past week. Counter voting is not allowed, and those who engage in it will lose their voting privileges for an extended period of time. If a member thinks a vote is so clearly terrible that it deserves a counter, then it's likely that an objective 3rd party (the moderator) will as well, and the right thing can take place whereby that vote is deleted.

If we want to change this, and go back to the days of counter voting, I'm happy to engage in that discussion, but until further notice it still is not allowed.

3) "Pending RFDs"

I don't believe any actual discussion has taken place on this so I'd like to hear thoughts on it and we can come up with a reasonable policy for it. In the meantime "Pending RFDs" are not allowed.

This doesn't include comments saying "I plan to vote later" without actually placing a vote yet, correct? Just asking for clarification. I know I tend to do this - comment saying I'll vote later, but I don't select a winner until after I've gotten the RFD up.

A voter must place his vote and within a reasonable amount of time actually include the RFD. This means within an hour or so. If the debate is within an hour of the voting period ending, then the RFD must be placed with 10 minutes. Write your RFD and then vote.

I have deleted plenty of votes that say "RFD coming soon" or some equivalent, and then looked a few days later and not seen an RFD. There's really no justification for this. I understand that members may want to vote and then place an RFD later, but part of voting is writing up an RFD and the two can not be separated.

I hope we can have a lengthy discussion on this so that we can come up with something that is fair and reasonable. But at the moment, I think it's important that we insist on having RFDs placed within a reasonable amount of time as described above.

4) Vote lobbying

There's no rules against contacting people and asking them to vote. If there should be, let's have that discussion, but right now there isn't, and I don't think the simple act of asking people to vote should be against the rules. Naturally there's a fine line between what I think we are all ok with, and what can be viewed as less ethical and it's necessary to determine what we are all comfortable with, and what we aren't.

Pretty sure it is against the rules to ask people to vote a specific way though. This was an issue with some users a while back.

What I do have a serious problem with is offering prid pro quo for votes, and if it can be proven someone is doing such a thing to manipulate the results of any debate, then there are consequences for that. I don't think any explicit rule has ever been made about this, but negatively threatening the integrity of debates in any way has always been implicitly against the rules.

I'm not jumping to any conclusions about who has done what regarding these types of things, and as always I will be thorough in investigating these types of issues, but I want to make it clear that bribing people to vote in a particular way is not allowed.

Other stuff

1) Ban/trial threads

Making a thread asking for a member to be banned or put on trial is against the rules. It falls under the policy against making member attack threads. If you have an issue with a member, contact a moderator.

2) Threats of moderator action

This is against the rules. If something is worth reporting, report it. That is the extent to what you are allowed to do. Saying "I'm going to tell Airmax or the moderator on you" is not allowed, nor is replying to a post with "Reported". If something actually is worth reporting, contact me or simply use the report function. Members need to refrain from making threats like this. It's rarely productive and often just escalates whatever problem is occurring at the moment.

(Inb4 'reported')

...

So that's it for now. The above are the issues I wanted to address and I'm happy to discuss any of them. If you have any questions please ask.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:54:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:48:03 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
If votes can be deleted at any time, and as such, debate wins overturned at any time, I see no reason why an RFD cannot be delayed. We have seen some RFDs that are thousands of characters, and I see no reason why a vote cannot be cast, to ensure the correct debater is the victor, and write the RFD when the voter has time.

I would say the RFD must be made within one week, or the vote is deleted.
There is no reason why the debaters, in a heated contest where they are monitoring RFDs, would "forget" to ensure the RFD comes. If it does not, the vote is reported, and subsequently deleted.
Simple as that.

I think this is a good place to start the discussion, and I'll mostly step aside and allow it to happen.

I'll just say that those members who place long RFDs generally do so in a reasonable amount of time. I generally haven't had this issue with any of those members. It's the type of vote that get placed almost immediately after the debate, and says something like "RFD in comments" and then never actually gets placed. I think we can certainly allow more leeway than I described above, but I also think that it's not unreasonable for a member to place an RFD around the same time that they vote. If they can't find the time to write their RFD it seems reasonable enough for them to just delay their vote until they do have time.

In any case, I appreciate your thoughts here and I do believe we can be flexible. I look forward to seeing how others feel about this issue.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:57:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:53:30 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
Hey DDO!

How's it goin?

I hope you are all well and having a great start to your February.

So some stuff has happened and I'd like to give a brief update, reiterate some general rules, and advance some discussion where it's needed.

Voting stuff

1) DK and Emil's debate

Every vote on that debate is still under review and the results of it are still pending. I've already spent hours on it and I will get back to it as soon as I can. There are naturally some complications with last second votes, counter votes, vote lobbying, pending RFD votes, and other things as well as some poor votes that are likely to be deleted soon. All I can say now is that I'm aware of all the issues and I'm working on it.

2) Counter voting.

Counter voting is not allowed. We can certainly have a discussion about whether or not it should be, and that's perfectly fine. But at the moment it isn't, and I know that most are aware of this.

If we'd like to have a system where members can counter whatever they like because they don't like a vote - then fine, let's have that discussion and no longer have counter votes be against the rules. I'm happy to engage in that discussion. But that isn't the case right now, so counter votes need to stop. They don't assist in making voting fair, they only make it so that 2 votes need deletion instead of one. If you have a problem with a vote you can report it, and that's it. In most cases those votes are deleted in a reasonable amount of time.

I want to make this absolutely clear because it's an issue that isn't related to just the past week. Counter voting is not allowed, and those who engage in it will lose their voting privileges for an extended period of time. If a member thinks a vote is so clearly terrible that it deserves a counter, then it's likely that an objective 3rd party (the moderator) will as well, and the right thing can take place whereby that vote is deleted.

If we want to change this, and go back to the days of counter voting, I'm happy to engage in that discussion, but until further notice it still is not allowed.

3) "Pending RFDs"

I don't believe any actual discussion has taken place on this so I'd like to hear thoughts on it and we can come up with a reasonable policy for it. In the meantime "Pending RFDs" are not allowed.

This doesn't include comments saying "I plan to vote later" without actually placing a vote yet, correct? Just asking for clarification. I know I tend to do this - comment saying I'll vote later, but I don't select a winner until after I've gotten the RFD up.

If the vote doesn't actually award any points, it's not what I'm referring to here. I think placing a neutral vote, then writing up an RFD, then putting the points where appropriate is generally fine.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 9:58:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:53:30 PM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
Hey DDO!

How's it goin?

I hope you are all well and having a great start to your February.

So some stuff has happened and I'd like to give a brief update, reiterate some general rules, and advance some discussion where it's needed.

Voting stuff

1) DK and Emil's debate

Every vote on that debate is still under review and the results of it are still pending. I've already spent hours on it and I will get back to it as soon as I can. There are naturally some complications with last second votes, counter votes, vote lobbying, pending RFD votes, and other things as well as some poor votes that are likely to be deleted soon. All I can say now is that I'm aware of all the issues and I'm working on it.

2) Counter voting.

Counter voting is not allowed. We can certainly have a discussion about whether or not it should be, and that's perfectly fine. But at the moment it isn't, and I know that most are aware of this.

If we'd like to have a system where members can counter whatever they like because they don't like a vote - then fine, let's have that discussion and no longer have counter votes be against the rules. I'm happy to engage in that discussion. But that isn't the case right now, so counter votes need to stop. They don't assist in making voting fair, they only make it so that 2 votes need deletion instead of one. If you have a problem with a vote you can report it, and that's it. In most cases those votes are deleted in a reasonable amount of time.

I want to make this absolutely clear because it's an issue that isn't related to just the past week. Counter voting is not allowed, and those who engage in it will lose their voting privileges for an extended period of time. If a member thinks a vote is so clearly terrible that it deserves a counter, then it's likely that an objective 3rd party (the moderator) will as well, and the right thing can take place whereby that vote is deleted.

If we want to change this, and go back to the days of counter voting, I'm happy to engage in that discussion, but until further notice it still is not allowed.

3) "Pending RFDs"

I don't believe any actual discussion has taken place on this so I'd like to hear thoughts on it and we can come up with a reasonable policy for it. In the meantime "Pending RFDs" are not allowed.

This doesn't include comments saying "I plan to vote later" without actually placing a vote yet, correct? Just asking for clarification. I know I tend to do this - comment saying I'll vote later, but I don't select a winner until after I've gotten the RFD up.

A voter must place his vote and within a reasonable amount of time actually include the RFD. This means within an hour or so. If the debate is within an hour of the voting period ending, then the RFD must be placed with 10 minutes. Write your RFD and then vote.

I have deleted plenty of votes that say "RFD coming soon" or some equivalent, and then looked a few days later and not seen an RFD. There's really no justification for this. I understand that members may want to vote and then place an RFD later, but part of voting is writing up an RFD and the two can not be separated.

I hope we can have a lengthy discussion on this so that we can come up with something that is fair and reasonable. But at the moment, I think it's important that we insist on having RFDs placed within a reasonable amount of time as described above.

4) Vote lobbying

There's no rules against contacting people and asking them to vote. If there should be, let's have that discussion, but right now there isn't, and I don't think the simple act of asking people to vote should be against the rules. Naturally there's a fine line between what I think we are all ok with, and what can be viewed as less ethical and it's necessary to determine what we are all comfortable with, and what we aren't.

Pretty sure it is against the rules to ask people to vote a specific way though. This was an issue with some users a while back.

It's not an issue to just ask people to vote in general. If people are asking people to vote for them, and telling them how to vote for them, and telling them they'll vote for them if they vote for them, then it becomes an issue.
Debate.org Moderator
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:02:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:54:32 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:48:03 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
If votes can be deleted at any time, and as such, debate wins overturned at any time, I see no reason why an RFD cannot be delayed. We have seen some RFDs that are thousands of characters, and I see no reason why a vote cannot be cast, to ensure the correct debater is the victor, and write the RFD when the voter has time.

I would say the RFD must be made within one week, or the vote is deleted.
There is no reason why the debaters, in a heated contest where they are monitoring RFDs, would "forget" to ensure the RFD comes. If it does not, the vote is reported, and subsequently deleted.
Simple as that.

I think this is a good place to start the discussion, and I'll mostly step aside and allow it to happen.

I'll just say that those members who place long RFDs generally do so in a reasonable amount of time. I generally haven't had this issue with any of those members. It's the type of vote that get placed almost immediately after the debate, and says something like "RFD in comments" and then never actually gets placed. I think we can certainly allow more leeway than I described above, but I also think that it's not unreasonable for a member to place an RFD around the same time that they vote. If they can't find the time to write their RFD it seems reasonable enough for them to just delay their vote until they do have time.

In any case, I appreciate your thoughts here and I do believe we can be flexible. I look forward to seeing how others feel about this issue.

I get the novella RFDs are not the issue, but as a policy, it should be as consistent as possible, right?
Perhaps a week is too long, but it could be argued that me defending my decision to vote a certain way (well, maybe not me, but you get the idea) may actually influence others to vote a different way, thus RFDs should actually be supplied AFTER the winner is declared.

As I said, I see the onus to report/find bad votes is on the debaters, not the moderators. And non-existent RFDs are easy to spot for debaters who actually care about their ELO and stats.
A tempered response with knowledge that policy can change the winner after the debate is over eliminates the need for CVB on inferred VBs.
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.
Tsar of DDO
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:12:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:02:07 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:54:32 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 9:48:03 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
If votes can be deleted at any time, and as such, debate wins overturned at any time, I see no reason why an RFD cannot be delayed. We have seen some RFDs that are thousands of characters, and I see no reason why a vote cannot be cast, to ensure the correct debater is the victor, and write the RFD when the voter has time.

I would say the RFD must be made within one week, or the vote is deleted.
There is no reason why the debaters, in a heated contest where they are monitoring RFDs, would "forget" to ensure the RFD comes. If it does not, the vote is reported, and subsequently deleted.
Simple as that.

I think this is a good place to start the discussion, and I'll mostly step aside and allow it to happen.

I'll just say that those members who place long RFDs generally do so in a reasonable amount of time. I generally haven't had this issue with any of those members. It's the type of vote that get placed almost immediately after the debate, and says something like "RFD in comments" and then never actually gets placed. I think we can certainly allow more leeway than I described above, but I also think that it's not unreasonable for a member to place an RFD around the same time that they vote. If they can't find the time to write their RFD it seems reasonable enough for them to just delay their vote until they do have time.

In any case, I appreciate your thoughts here and I do believe we can be flexible. I look forward to seeing how others feel about this issue.

I get the novella RFDs are not the issue, but as a policy, it should be as consistent as possible, right?

It should be.

Perhaps a week is too long, but it could be argued that me defending my decision to vote a certain way (well, maybe not me, but you get the idea) may actually influence others to vote a different way, thus RFDs should actually be supplied AFTER the winner is declared.

I'm not really sure I understand this. I think RFDs should be supplied at the time of the vote (or close to it) and certainly before the voting period ends. As for how it influences others, that another issue and perhaps there is value in working around this, but that's a separate issue that's a bit out of the scope of this.


As I said, I see the onus to report/find bad votes is on the debaters, not the moderators.

It most certainly is. I don't seek out bad votes, I just deal with the ones that are reported. In more difficult cases, I contact both debaters so that the issues can be worked out in a way that both feel is fair.

And non-existent RFDs are easy to spot for debaters who actually care about their ELO and stats.

This is true. This issue is mostly to address late votes that are placed and then intended to somehow justify whatever points were given later.

A tempered response with knowledge that policy can change the winner after the debate is over eliminates the need for CVB on inferred VBs.

Either way, this issue isn't something that is unresolvable when it happens. If a voter fails to provide an RFD the vote is just removed. I just believe that voting should include an RFD and that it should be done within a reasonable time frame (what's a reasonable time frame is what this discussion is about). I get literal "lack of RFD" reports often enough, and I think having a reasonable idea of at what point we should expect that RFD to be provided will give voters an idea of how much time they have, and me an idea of at what point it's fair for me to simply delete that vote.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:14:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

haha yeah that's what I was going for... I've run out of ways to say "Moderator update thread"
Debate.org Moderator
Zaradi
Posts: 14,124
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:14:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

How did it not remind you of Mario?
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:15:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:14:23 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

How did it not remind you of Mario?

I... didn't play Mario as a kid....

I know I know....
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:15:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:14:10 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

haha yeah that's what I was going for... I've run out of ways to say "Moderator update thread"

lol I like it
Tsar of DDO
Zaradi
Posts: 14,124
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:16:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:15:15 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:23 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

How did it not remind you of Mario?

I... didn't play Mario as a kid....

https://mememagnetic.files.wordpress.com...
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:16:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:12:03 PM, airmax1227 wrote:

Either way, this issue isn't something that is unresolvable when it happens. If a voter fails to provide an RFD the vote is just removed. I just believe that voting should include an RFD and that it should be done within a reasonable time frame (what's a reasonable time frame is what this discussion is about). I get literal "lack of RFD" reports often enough, and I think having a reasonable idea of at what point we should expect that RFD to be provided will give voters an idea of how much time they have,
I say two days to report should be the standard.
This gives time to remind the voter to supply one via moderator PM.

and me an idea of at what point it's fair for me to simply delete that vote.
One week to delete, regardless when the vote was cast (in relation to end of voting period) or any actions taken by debaters or moderation. The voter failed in his duty at this point.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:18:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:16:56 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:12:03 PM, airmax1227 wrote:

Either way, this issue isn't something that is unresolvable when it happens. If a voter fails to provide an RFD the vote is just removed. I just believe that voting should include an RFD and that it should be done within a reasonable time frame (what's a reasonable time frame is what this discussion is about). I get literal "lack of RFD" reports often enough, and I think having a reasonable idea of at what point we should expect that RFD to be provided will give voters an idea of how much time they have,
I say two days to report should be the standard.
This gives time to remind the voter to supply one via moderator PM.

and me an idea of at what point it's fair for me to simply delete that vote.
One week to delete, regardless when the vote was cast (in relation to end of voting period) or any actions taken by debaters or moderation. The voter failed in his duty at this point.

I think this is a reasonable enough position.
Debate.org Moderator
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:20:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:16:54 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:15:15 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:23 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

How did it not remind you of Mario?

I... didn't play Mario as a kid....

https://mememagnetic.files.wordpress.com...

http://defsi.typepad.com...
Tsar of DDO
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:20:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The only issue I have is what you say about trials. I don't think a trial for anybody is necessary at the moment but to say there is no threads allowed to call for one is ridiculous. You're basically saying trial processes can't occur unless you approve of them, which pretty much destroys the point of having them even allowed to start with.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:20:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:15:43 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:10 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

haha yeah that's what I was going for... I've run out of ways to say "Moderator update thread"

lol I like it

I think my last thread title was literally "This is a thread from Airmax"... so I'm clearly in need for new ways to say pretty much that... I guess I could just make the thread "Moderator update" and then add a number or perhaps the date... I guess this really isn't a huge problem.
Debate.org Moderator
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:21:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think it depends. If it's a known shitty voter, then I see no reason why their vote shouldn't just be deleted. But if it's a reputable member, then I think two days and no more is fair.

That said, i think that most debates should be "judge only" debates.
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:23:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:20:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:15:43 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:10 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

haha yeah that's what I was going for... I've run out of ways to say "Moderator update thread"

lol I like it

I think my last thread title was literally "This is a thread from Airmax"... so I'm clearly in need for new ways to say pretty much that... I guess I could just make the thread "Moderator update" and then add a number or perhaps the date... I guess this really isn't a huge problem.

Suggestions:

I can haz moderator update.

Dis be an update. From da mod.

Behold! An update! Read, I command you!

I grant you [x]. Grovel at my feet accordingly.
Tsar of DDO
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:24:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:21:47 PM, YYW wrote:
I think it depends. If it's a known shitty voter, then I see no reason why their vote shouldn't just be deleted. But if it's a reputable member, then I think two days and no more is fair.

That said, i think that most debates should be "judge only" debates.

I think it's probably best if the time frame allowed is consistent for all voters.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:24:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:23:57 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:20:40 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:15:43 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:10 PM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

haha yeah that's what I was going for... I've run out of ways to say "Moderator update thread"

lol I like it

I think my last thread title was literally "This is a thread from Airmax"... so I'm clearly in need for new ways to say pretty much that... I guess I could just make the thread "Moderator update" and then add a number or perhaps the date... I guess this really isn't a huge problem.

Suggestions:

I can haz moderator update.

Dis be an update. From da mod.

Behold! An update! Read, I command you!

I grant you [x]. Grovel at my feet accordingly.

haha all solid ideas
Debate.org Moderator
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:28:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 9:41:50 PM, airmax1227 wrote:


I didn't know you were Italian.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Zaradi
Posts: 14,124
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:30:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/4/2015 10:20:00 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:16:54 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:15:15 PM, YYW wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:14:23 PM, Zaradi wrote:
At 2/4/2015 10:11:20 PM, YYW wrote:
When you said "It'sa me" you reminded me of the owner of a little Italian place in my neighborhood.... he still talks like he's from the old country.

How did it not remind you of Mario?

I... didn't play Mario as a kid....

https://mememagnetic.files.wordpress.com...

http://defsi.typepad.com...

http://cdn.meme.am...
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...
komododragon8
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/4/2015 10:30:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey Airmax this is a little off topic but I have been having a lot of trouble uploading certain posts. I tried to upload a post about feminism with the word s-l-u-twalk it it but the site moderated the entire opinion. Im sure other people are going to have this problem and it may lead to some frustration. I was hoping that the moderation policy could be tweaked a little if you have the time.