Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Voting Issues Update

bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2015 2:47:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
A few things that are important and relevant to some users:

(1) Statute of limitations. As I've stated before, except in very rare and extreme circumstances, debates that have a closed voting period for more than a month will not have votes removed. I can't really define what those circumstances are where the debate will still be moderated, besides saying that if you were gone from the site from over a month and if the only vote on the debate is from your opponent's multiaccount, the vote will probably get removed. But absent such extreme circumstances, we're not taking any action. Report votes as soon as they come in, or you risk losing your chance.

(2) Votes that occur between the voting period closing and one month. Votes issued during this time period will be removed *only if* the impermissible points altered the outcome. So let's say someone votes 5 points to your opponent and the final score is 5-0, and you report the vote. It turns out the argument point is sufficiently explained but sources are not. The vote *will not* be removed because the score is legitimately 3-0. You don't get to deny your opponent the win - after the voting period has closed - by reporting a single deficient point. For one, your opponent can no longer PM new people to vote to make up for the error. For another, there's a concern that debaters will act strategically and wait until the voting period closes and there's nothing their opponent can do to compensate for the single deficient point.

(3) Rap battles, hot models, troll debates, and any other non-standard debate are generally not going to be moderated for RFD quality. We'll remove obvious 7 point vote bombs that don't explain all the points, but if the RFD mentions every point category, it's legitimate. Also, unless you specify the voting criteria judges are to use, they can use any criteria they want. So on a rap battle, unless you specify in the rules that the judges have to vote for the better rapper, judges can vote for someone because they like their profile picture better. In a hot model debate, unless you specify that judges are to choose the person who posted the more attractive pictures, judges can vote on things like who better upheld the value of racial diversity. The *advice* I would give to someone who is doing a non-traditional debate would be to use the "choose winner" system to avoid people using points strategically against them and to clearly specify in Round 1 what standard judges are to apply.

I can conceive of alternative systems for moderating non-standard debates, but the current policy is the current policy, and I've outlined the best way someone can ensure fair voting and the best possible moderation on their debates if they choose to do them under the current policy.

(4) Forfeits. If one side forfeits a substantial number of rounds, we're not going to moderate the RFD's. We initially removed RFD's when it was a single round forfeit on a long debate and people were awarding all 7 points. We will continue to hold people to the standard that it's generally only permissible to award conduct when there are substantial arguments from the debater who forfeited and the forfeit was a single round. But beyond that, please *stop* reporting RFD's when one side forfeited a substantial part of the debate. We have limited time and resources as moderators, and votes on debaters where one side didn't care enough not to forfeit half the rounds is not something you should be directing our attention to. And if you're the one who forfeited, the simple solution is not to forfeit. It will generally result in you losing.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Mikal
Posts: 11,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2015 2:58:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/26/2015 2:47:10 PM, bluesteel wrote:
A few things that are important and relevant to some users:

*humps your leg*
Death23
Posts: 779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2015 5:27:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The ability to report votes could be made available only to those people who have standing to report them (i.e. the debaters, unless the content of the RFD is in violation of the TOU for reasons like obscenities or racially offensive content). This might help.
Lee001
Posts: 3,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2015 5:35:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/26/2015 2:58:45 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 4/26/2015 2:47:10 PM, bluesteel wrote:
A few things that are important and relevant to some users:

*humps your leg*

You would..
"Condoms are societal constructs created by the government to restrain 'Murican freedom!"-SolonKR

"But I jest and digress (sick rhymes, yo); every boob is equal in the eyes of the Lord."- SolonKR

"Oh Hey, Seeing Artichokes Makes Me Want to Have Sex."- SolonKR

"Yep, but anyone who touches my hair immediately ascends to the heavens..You're already an angel, so touching my hair can do nothing <3" -SolonKR

My hubby Hayd <3 <3
Varrack
Posts: 2,410
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2015 12:44:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
A few questions:

1. In debates where the BOP is never specified, is a voter justified in making the assumption that one debater or the other has the full BOP, or must they always assume that the BOP is equally shared?

2. I've heard some say that a debate shouldn't be judged by its comments. Is this true? If I finished a debate then made a rule change in the comments section, is a voter obliged to follow that change?

3. In debates that argue over semantics, and semantics becomes a prime factor in voting (for example, Pro starts a debate but Con provides a definition, then Pro disputes that definition and so on) should a voter go with the first definition provided or with the one they believe made the most sense?
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2015 12:49:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/28/2015 12:44:50 AM, Varrack wrote:
A few questions:

1. In debates where the BOP is never specified, is a voter justified in making the assumption that one debater or the other has the full BOP, or must they always assume that the BOP is equally shared?

I'd say the person offering a proposition has the BOP for that proposition, but for the debate as a whole, it'd probably be unfair to decide the debate on a BOP issue if it was never specified who had the BOP, so treat it as shared.

This isn't really something I police though as moderator.


2. I've heard some say that a debate shouldn't be judged by its comments. Is this true? If I finished a debate then made a rule change in the comments section, is a voter obliged to follow that change?

Judges have no duty to read the comments section before voting. I'd say that they have an affirmative duty not to read or consider arguments made in the comments section, beyond the character limit of the debate.


3. In debates that argue over semantics, and semantics becomes a prime factor in voting (for example, Pro starts a debate but Con provides a definition, then Pro disputes that definition and so on) should a voter go with the first definition provided or with the one they believe made the most sense?

I strongly believe that definitions, like any other arguments, may be argued by both sides, and the judge should vote for the definition that was argued more persuasively in the debate.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)