Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

The concept of peer pressure and DDO

Tough
Posts: 167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2015 1:27:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Certain things about DDO I feel encourage peer pressure in multiple ways and I do have huge issue with this.

Aside from the fact that when voting on any debate people are fully able to see who is winning (against their will) and then to see what people before have justified their vote with and specifically how they split the points (with their consent) means that there is undeniably a high probability that the votes after the first, second and third have cumulative peer pressure influencing how they went and what was voted.

This isn't to suggest that it is always in support of the one with majority. Hipster psychology is definitely a factor at play too. People sometimes are voting to 'defend' the current vote loser as they perceive vote-bullying whether they outright admit to it or not.

In addition, the site's presidential voting system as well as the criteria to qualify as a voter are all very prone to peer pressure and based on very little to do with one's capability to judge which candidate can actually run the site best. An old user of the site has done nothing to prove that they understand presidency or the responsibilities involved any more than a newer user to the site in any way other than having used the site for a longer amount of time since their account's creation. Furthermore, the fact that the votes are not anonymously PM'd to someone trustworthy and unbiased such as the site administrator or someone working under them is still a major mystery to me. Public voting on positions of power is archaic and human civilizations have long outgrown this in almost every nation on Earth whether developed or underdeveloped.

It is true that in real-life elections age (analogous to account age) is a major criterion as well as not being incarcerated at the time of election but what is unclear is why an online website, which has a smaller voting pool and more methods of creating peer pressure and small-scale gangs having major influence on it are using length of account life as the sole criterion.
Who is more terrifying; the one who is correct and successfully proves the liar wrong or the liar who successfully proves the correct one wrong?
Zaradi
Posts: 14,125
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2015 4:40:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'll try to answer some of your concerns as best as I can.

At 8/24/2015 1:27:29 AM, Tough wrote:
Certain things about DDO I feel encourage peer pressure in multiple ways and I do have huge issue with this.

Aside from the fact that when voting on any debate people are fully able to see who is winning (against their will) and then to see what people before have justified their vote with and specifically how they split the points (with their consent) means that there is undeniably a high probability that the votes after the first, second and third have cumulative peer pressure influencing how they went and what was voted.

I disagree that this is actually a thing. There's multiple examples of votes being overwhelmingly in one person's favor, yet the other side comes back to win the debate.

Furthermore, that's not actually the mentality of a good judge. Judges should, and ought to in an ideal judging world, come into debates from a blank slate, and be objective enough to not factor the score into things. Insofar as we're trying to encourage people to become better judges, we're already trying to fix this problem, supposing it existed.

This isn't to suggest that it is always in support of the one with majority. Hipster psychology is definitely a factor at play too. People sometimes are voting to 'defend' the current vote loser as they perceive vote-bullying whether they outright admit to it or not.

I'm...not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. Debates aren't necessarily polls in that people vote for which side of the debate they agree with, rather they vote for which debater did the better job debating. That might require them to vote against their own beliefs, which seems to defeat what you're saying, if I'm understanding it right.

In addition, the site's presidential voting system as well as the criteria to qualify as a voter are all very prone to peer pressure and based on very little to do with one's capability to judge which candidate can actually run the site best.

I disagree with this on multiple levels. The vast majority of the restrictions are in place to ensure that voters who are deciding the presidency are members who have an active state and interest in the site. This provides multiple benefits for being a decent voter for the presidency:

1. If you've been around for a while and been active on the site, you've probably gotten to know and understand the site a little bit. You've seen the culture of the site, found things that you like about the site and things you don't like about the site. You see things you'd like changed or fixed and things that are just good the way they are. You can then transfer that knowledge to analyzing the proposed platforms of presidential candidates and see if your views of the site match up with their views of the site, and thus, which candidate you'd support. If you haven't been around for the site, you're more likely to lack this knowledge, and thus wouldn't be able to do this.

2. If you've been around for a while and been active on the site, you've probably met and interacted with a few people. Unless you're just entirely socially reclusive to the point where you don't interact with anyone, in which case you're probably not that active on the site, you've probably made a few friends and gotten to know a few people. You've gotten a good grasp on what kinds of people they are and what character they're made of. You can then transfer that knowledge onto trying to see which candidate you would support.

Furthermore, the fact that the votes are not anonymously PM'd to someone trustworthy and unbiased such as the site administrator or someone working under them is still a major mystery to me. Public voting on positions of power is archaic and human civilizations have long outgrown this in almost every nation on Earth whether developed or underdeveloped.

It used to be private in the first few elections, but are done so publicly now because not everyone/every site we could use to do the elections privately is trustworthy. Furthermore, there's only a few people on the site that I'd personally trust to conduct something like this privately, and as far as I know, none of them are willing to do this. So as of right now, it's off the table.
Want to debate? Pick a topic and hit me up! - http://www.debate.org...