Total Posts:69|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Bad Voting on "FF" Debates.

donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 8:35:16 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Full Forfeitures may very well be worth a full loss of points. One ff is worth a loss of conduct, no doubt.

However, we need to set a base standard that ALL votes must be applied to... One ff should NOT cause 10-20+ hours of work and 10-30k characters of effort to become meaningless. It's understandable to lose because of a forfeiture, but to lose with an RFD that only says "ff" is unacceptable. The voter's still have the responsibility of at least pretending they read the debate before voting.

Take both of these examples:
- http://www.debate.org...
- http://www.debate.org...

Both debate had full effort placed into them. They both had at least two rounds of arguments, rebuttals, and defenses. Both debaters made points that should be been examined by the voters. The only reason the Refugee debate had one RFD that examined the debate is because I threatened to kick the member from the VU for breaking Voter Union rules. In that same debate, the ff was in the dead beginning, so it in no way affected any of the debate.

The Moderator can't do anything because it's up to the voter's to determine how to treat a ff... While that's true, it shouldn't mean there should not be a base level the voter's can't go below.

If a whole debate exists beyond the one ff, that debate should still get noticed, even if you still vote based around the ff. If you aren't going to include the rest of the debate in your analyze, then why bother voting?

During a normal RFD, no matter what causes you to vote for Pro or Con, you are still required to examine the rest of the debate or your vote is removed. So why should one missed round void that very requirement? Shouldn't that requirement be universal for all votes? (A debate were every round is a ff obviously exempt, as there is no debate to review.)

Treating debaters like their effort matters shouldn't be optional. Besides, no one who cares about the debate just posts 'ff...' It's only ever used to strategically vote for friends, or for the side you agree with.

What I'm saying is, the standard for voting should apply to ffs as well, regardless of if you just give them the win over the ff anyways. If you're going to vote, it's got to actually be a full vote. If you, the debater, spent twenty hours typing and researching for something you believe in, then you'd want the voters to at least mention the arguments you made before telling you you lost.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Bump
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Posts: 146
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 10:40:40 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Bump

Is this voters Union advice or are you ranting against the site in general?

If VU business, disregard my two cents in the next paragraph.

If in general, then by all means, continue. The amount of time a person spends on their own debate is up to them. It is and should be completely independent to the effort each voter is willing to give. That's a personal decision. It's like a football game to me. Win big or win ugly, I don't care. It's a W. I put x amount of effort into my own debates for me, not for anyone else to say "oh you worked really hard so here's a lot of words." Anyone wants to write FF on mine and toss me a conduct point, be my guest. Thanks for stopping by. Hope you enjoyed it but if not, your point vote is appreciated. Hope you check out the next one. You want to offer a full critique, that's cool too. Either works as long as it isn't 0-0.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 11:28:03 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 10:40:40 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Bump

Is this voters Union advice or are you ranting against the site in general?

If VU business, disregard my two cents in the next paragraph.

If in general, then by all means, continue. The amount of time a person spends on their own debate is up to them. It is and should be completely independent to the effort each voter is willing to give. That's a personal decision. It's like a football game to me. Win big or win ugly, I don't care. It's a W. I put x amount of effort into my own debates for me, not for anyone else to say "oh you worked really hard so here's a lot of words." Anyone wants to write FF on mine and toss me a conduct point, be my guest. Thanks for stopping by. Hope you enjoyed it but if not, your point vote is appreciated. Hope you check out the next one. You want to offer a full critique, that's cool too. Either works as long as it isn't 0-0.

The amount of effort a debater puts into his debate is entirely up to him, as the only person it effects is himself. If he puts in little effort, he loses, and him alone. This same logic doesn't apply to voters, who's votes impact other members. This is why there are no standards for how well you have to debate, but voter's must put in a base-level amount of effort or their votes are removed.

Try saying "the amount of effort I put into my votes is entirely up to me..." next time Whiteflame removes your vote.

When you choose to vote, you accept a responsibility to vote right, because how you vote impacts the debaters.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Posts: 146
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 11:43:12 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 11:28:03 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:40:40 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Bump

Is this voters Union advice or are you ranting against the site in general?

If VU business, disregard my two cents in the next paragraph.

If in general, then by all means, continue. The amount of time a person spends on their own debate is up to them. It is and should be completely independent to the effort each voter is willing to give. That's a personal decision. It's like a football game to me. Win big or win ugly, I don't care. It's a W. I put x amount of effort into my own debates for me, not for anyone else to say "oh you worked really hard so here's a lot of words." Anyone wants to write FF on mine and toss me a conduct point, be my guest. Thanks for stopping by. Hope you enjoyed it but if not, your point vote is appreciated. Hope you check out the next one. You want to offer a full critique, that's cool too. Either works as long as it isn't 0-0.

The amount of effort a debater puts into his debate is entirely up to him, as the only person it effects is himself. If he puts in little effort, he loses, and him alone. This same logic doesn't apply to voters, who's votes impact other members. This is why there are no standards for how well you have to debate, but voter's must put in a base-level amount of effort or their votes are removed.

Try saying "the amount of effort I put into my votes is entirely up to me..." next time Whiteflame removes your vote.

When you choose to vote, you accept a responsibility to vote right, because how you vote impacts the debaters.

Hey I accept whiteflames decision by logging into the site. I may protest, I may reword, or I may offer suggestions, but I generally make the effort to play by the voting rules. I've only had 1 reported I think and I resubmitted it with a better description. Still said the same basic thing. I'm ok with that.

But if I miss a turn, and someone dings me with a conduct point, that's ok. My bad. I'm not worried about hurt feelings and attaboys. We shouldn't be. I either made my point or I didn't. You are either motivated to vote or you aren't. I accept going in that all of the above may happen and I'm good with it.
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2016 11:43:22 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 8:35:16 AM, donald.keller wrote:
We need to set a base standard that ALL votes must be applied to...

I've been an advocate of this for years, particularly the "we" part. If a new standard is to be be implemented, it should be discussed openly and refined as a group effort, rather than just appear out of the blue.

To begin, I believe all votes should meet their minimal BoP (explained more at: https://docs.google.com...).

Secondly, I feel there should be two different outlined standards. The minimal base standard (you're not trading votes, you're reading the debate, you're commenting on some debate specific content, etc); and then an ideal level well beyond those basics, which we should hope for, but should not be the requirement.

Regarding the two link's provided by Donald: I am not in favor of the voting in the first one, but will go so far as to deny any accusations of it being a disgrace to voting ("o.o -.- o.o o.O?" would be a fine example of a disgrace to voting) but the examples in the second one I find troubling. How is a weak conclusion bad conduct? "I cannot make my argument this round... My apologies." dsjpk5's vote noted a rule specified in the setup of the debate, and applied his interpretation of it; ok. Two of the others had big "FF," as in Full Forfeit... I have no reason to suspect they even glanced at the debate before voting.
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...
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 12:10:19 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 11:43:22 PM, Ragnar wrote:
At 3/2/2016 8:35:16 AM, donald.keller wrote:
We need to set a base standard that ALL votes must be applied to...

I've been an advocate of this for years, particularly the "we" part. If a new standard is to be be implemented, it should be discussed openly and refined as a group effort, rather than just appear out of the blue.

To begin, I believe all votes should meet their minimal BoP (explained more at: https://docs.google.com...).

Secondly, I feel there should be two different outlined standards. The minimal base standard (you're not trading votes, you're reading the debate, you're commenting on some debate specific content, etc); and then an ideal level well beyond those basics, which we should hope for, but should not be the requirement.

Regarding the two link's provided by Donald: I am not in favor of the voting in the first one, but will go so far as to deny any accusations of it being a disgrace to voting ("o.o -.- o.o o.O?" would be a fine example of a disgrace to voting) but the examples in the second one I find troubling. How is a weak conclusion bad conduct? "I cannot make my argument this round... My apologies." dsjpk5's vote noted a rule specified in the setup of the debate, and applied his interpretation of it; ok. Two of the others had big "FF," as in Full Forfeit... I have no reason to suspect they even glanced at the debate before voting.

I can assure you none of the voters in either debate writing "ff" actually read the debate. I know for certain that in the second debate, Pro asked each voter to vote, and even told them how to (because he asked me as well.)

In the first example, the ff was in the very beginning... It didn't effect a single part of the debate.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 12:22:03 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/2/2016 11:43:12 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 11:28:03 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:40:40 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Bump

Is this voters Union advice or are you ranting against the site in general?

If VU business, disregard my two cents in the next paragraph.

If in general, then by all means, continue. The amount of time a person spends on their own debate is up to them. It is and should be completely independent to the effort each voter is willing to give. That's a personal decision. It's like a football game to me. Win big or win ugly, I don't care. It's a W. I put x amount of effort into my own debates for me, not for anyone else to say "oh you worked really hard so here's a lot of words." Anyone wants to write FF on mine and toss me a conduct point, be my guest. Thanks for stopping by. Hope you enjoyed it but if not, your point vote is appreciated. Hope you check out the next one. You want to offer a full critique, that's cool too. Either works as long as it isn't 0-0.

The amount of effort a debater puts into his debate is entirely up to him, as the only person it effects is himself. If he puts in little effort, he loses, and him alone. This same logic doesn't apply to voters, who's votes impact other members. This is why there are no standards for how well you have to debate, but voter's must put in a base-level amount of effort or their votes are removed.

Try saying "the amount of effort I put into my votes is entirely up to me..." next time Whiteflame removes your vote.

When you choose to vote, you accept a responsibility to vote right, because how you vote impacts the debaters.

Hey I accept whiteflames decision by logging into the site. I may protest, I may reword, or I may offer suggestions, but I generally make the effort to play by the voting rules. I've only had 1 reported I think and I resubmitted it with a better description. Still said the same basic thing. I'm ok with that.

But if I miss a turn, and someone dings me with a conduct point, that's ok. My bad. I'm not worried about hurt feelings and attaboys. We shouldn't be. I either made my point or I didn't. You are either motivated to vote or you aren't. I accept going in that all of the above may happen and I'm good with it.

You may be willing to accept that standard, but that doesn't mean every other debater who puts hours and effort into their debate is willing to accept the same. Most debaters want their effort to get noticed. In the second debate example I gave, the guy did entire rounds of argumentation, and NOT ONE voter read any of it.

Regardless, as a voter, you can give someone the win because of a ff all you want, but you must still examine the rest of the debate as well, because that it the base level standard for voting.

I hate when people say "well I don't mind group X doing this, so everyone else must accept it as well." If you're okay with people not reading the debate before voting against you, fine. But virtually everyone else wants the rest of their debate to be analyzed. They wouldn't have posted further rounds if they were okay with people ignoring the entire debate for a "ff".

Do you think Pro, in the first debate, would have posted anything if he wanted the voters to ignore it all?

When you vote, you accept a standard. Your vote is a very public thing with a very powerful impact on the debaters. Do you think this is a free-for-all site where you can vote how you wish because you don't have to care? There are rules. And it's about time those rules applied to high quality debates with one, or at most, 2 ffs as well...

Forget how you feel... Think about what Minddrag felt posting 20,000 characters and putting all of that effort into something he believes in, only to have everyone post "ff." You think those a$$hole voters read the debate? Hell no. They were asked to vote by pro, and went in with a generic 'ff' vote for their friend, and left. That kind of bs needs to be stopped. We need to make sure that the voters are reading the whole debate. Even if the debate had one ff out of 4 rounds.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid
Posts: 146
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 12:40:34 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 12:22:03 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2016 11:43:12 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 11:28:03 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:40:40 PM, diarrhea_of_a_wimpy_kid wrote:
At 3/2/2016 10:10:59 PM, donald.keller wrote:
Bump

Is this voters Union advice or are you ranting against the site in general?

If VU business, disregard my two cents in the next paragraph.

If in general, then by all means, continue. The amount of time a person spends on their own debate is up to them. It is and should be completely independent to the effort each voter is willing to give. That's a personal decision. It's like a football game to me. Win big or win ugly, I don't care. It's a W. I put x amount of effort into my own debates for me, not for anyone else to say "oh you worked really hard so here's a lot of words." Anyone wants to write FF on mine and toss me a conduct point, be my guest. Thanks for stopping by. Hope you enjoyed it but if not, your point vote is appreciated. Hope you check out the next one. You want to offer a full critique, that's cool too. Either works as long as it isn't 0-0.

The amount of effort a debater puts into his debate is entirely up to him, as the only person it effects is himself. If he puts in little effort, he loses, and him alone. This same logic doesn't apply to voters, who's votes impact other members. This is why there are no standards for how well you have to debate, but voter's must put in a base-level amount of effort or their votes are removed.

Try saying "the amount of effort I put into my votes is entirely up to me..." next time Whiteflame removes your vote.

When you choose to vote, you accept a responsibility to vote right, because how you vote impacts the debaters.

Hey I accept whiteflames decision by logging into the site. I may protest, I may reword, or I may offer suggestions, but I generally make the effort to play by the voting rules. I've only had 1 reported I think and I resubmitted it with a better description. Still said the same basic thing. I'm ok with that.

But if I miss a turn, and someone dings me with a conduct point, that's ok. My bad. I'm not worried about hurt feelings and attaboys. We shouldn't be. I either made my point or I didn't. You are either motivated to vote or you aren't. I accept going in that all of the above may happen and I'm good with it.

You may be willing to accept that standard, but that doesn't mean every other debater who puts hours and effort into their debate is willing to accept the same. Most debaters want their effort to get noticed. In the second debate example I gave, the guy did entire rounds of argumentation, and NOT ONE voter read any of it.

Regardless, as a voter, you can give someone the win because of a ff all you want, but you must still examine the rest of the debate as well, because that it the base level standard for voting.

I hate when people say "well I don't mind group X doing this, so everyone else must accept it as well." If you're okay with people not reading the debate before voting against you, fine. But virtually everyone else wants the rest of their debate to be analyzed. They wouldn't have posted further rounds if they were okay with people ignoring the entire debate for a "ff".

Do you think Pro, in the first debate, would have posted anything if he wanted the voters to ignore it all?

When you vote, you accept a standard. Your vote is a very public thing with a very powerful impact on the debaters. Do you think this is a free-for-all site where you can vote how you wish because you don't have to care? There are rules. And it's about time those rules applied to high quality debates with one, or at most, 2 ffs as well...

Forget how you feel... Think about what Minddrag felt posting 20,000 characters and putting all of that effort into something he believes in, only to have everyone post "ff." You think those a$$hole voters read the debate? Hell no. They were asked to vote by pro, and went in with a generic 'ff' vote for their friend, and left. That kind of bs needs to be stopped. We need to make sure that the voters are reading the whole debate. Even if the debate had one ff out of 4 rounds.

Yea, bro. You've made quite the emotional investment in this one. I'm thinking, "whoa dude, step away from the computer and enjoy the weather." But that's just it. You can get worked up if you want. It's the Internet. It's the Wild West. We have dozens of cultures, many age groups, working people, students, geniuses, morons, kids goofing off, and debaters honing skillz. You cannot hold the Internet to a rigid set of standards. It's impossible. You want strict rules, join a team. That's the risk in investing your own time. In fact the longer you make the debate, the fewer people will actually give a crap. So make the motivation intrinsic and not extrinsic.

And I acknowledge your point. We are philosophically different here and it's all good. So I will tip a cap and allow the discussion to continue, satisfied my opinion was stated.
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 12:45:29 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
I've got two opinions on this and admittedly they conflict:

1. If you put in hours of hard work research, writing and editing a high quality argument, your opponent does not, and it's obvious... then yes, you really do deserve at least some acknowledge of your effort. And more importantly that one forfeited turn should not lose you the debate.

2. However, if you forfeit a turn it is kind of difficult to turn around and complain about it. You forfeit the turn, that's on you, and by and large you forfeit the right to complain.

Ultimately it's the result of the system. The reality is that simply tossing down the word "forfeit" or "FF" as an RFD and awarding a conduct point is by far the easiest way to vote on this site. There's not another ELO point that you can award with such little explanation. Awarding any other point comes with a much higher level of scrutiny and therefore, yes, laziness abounds.

And I'll be the first to admit I'm guilty of doing so. For example if I come across a debate where Pro writes a 50,000 character scientific research paper with citing sources and the works; while Con simply says "I accept" and forfeits the next four turns: Everyone knows Pro won and no one needs to read 50,000 characters to figure that out. However, I can't say as much in an RFD. So yes, "FF" conduct to Pro.

I'm not saying it's right. I'm simply saying it's a product of the system. If you want to fix the problem, you've got to address the source. It's easy to blame the voters for being lazy but the reality is there's more to it than that.
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
http://www.debate.org...
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 5:28:31 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

"The sources, S&G and conduct points are just nonsense"

I like Sourcing... Aside from that, amen.

Regarding your center paragraph, THANK YOU! You see the second debate I gave above? How sad is that...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 7:05:09 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 5:28:31 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

"The sources, S&G and conduct points are just nonsense"

I like Sourcing... Aside from that, amen.

I disagree with them (S&G and conduct) being nonsense, but they are so frequently abused that I would not oppose their removal (not that I think we'll get any major updates).

To add to the defense of the source points: Sources are a pretty key area IMO. If beyond a doubt I mopped the floor with an opponent on sources, I clearly deserve credit there. Credit for a better researched argument and/or refuting the lesser research of my opponent, isn't the same as logically refuting anything outside of that. Well it is certainly interrelated, it is not assured.

Say I'm debating User A, and the sources clearly favor me, but User A's buddy on top of voting in his favor on arguments gives him the sources (and likely conduct for me refuting said sources proving what a meanie I am for hurting baby's feelings), it's instantly proof of the vote fluffery and thus can be removed with minimal effort. Whereas say User B also agrees that User A won arguments, but acknowledges the self evidence of the sources favoring me, causing User A to gain 1point for barely squeezing out a victory. A few more people vote, about an equal number favor each argument... It'd be a tie, except as everyone agrees one side excelled at sources, giving me a thin margin of victory, but still a victory for overall better efforts.
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...
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 3:13:18 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Upon rereading I don't think what you are saying here is unreasonable. If it's a single forfeited turn in a high quality debate, then a "FF" really shouldn't suffice.

And therefore my hypothetical example provided above of one debater going all out and the other forfeiting four turns really doesn't apply.

Personally I view high quality debates differently than low quality debates. "Quality" being based upon the amount of perceived effort put in collectively by both debaters, and obviously perception is subjective. The amount of effort that I put into a vote generally correlates to the quality of the debate. I won't say directly correlates because I'm sure there have been outliers and perception once again is subjective.

I'm willing to keep this forum in mind when voting on higher quality debates but I make no such promises on lower quality debates such as the hypothetical example that I previously stated.
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 3:30:16 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Furthermore I think you guys actually have a good system in place here. Better than people give it credit for.

I and a few others I am aware of come from the Wild Wild West of a debate site which lacked RFDs and moderators. It had its pros and its cons (excuse the pun).

Personally I think the "Select Winner" approach is better than the default 7 point ELO system, assuming there's still an RFD provided. In large part because I myself am less inclined to award a full 7 point win to either member due to forfeited turns alone. Then again I can't speak for others. I'm sure it all comes down to personal preference. But as I've already seen stated on a debate on this site, that option exists. If the Instigator creates the debate under the 7 point system and the Contender accepts the debate under the 7 point system, they've both agreed to said system. But now I'm just starting to talk in circles.
Ragnar
Posts: 1,658
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 8:05:25 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Before it spirals like other ones... http://www.debate.org...
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...
U.n
Posts: 214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 9:32:33 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 8:05:25 PM, Ragnar wrote:
Before it spirals like other ones... http://www.debate.org...

IMO it may be best to message individuals to ask them to reconsider or rescind their votes, assuming the debate is still in the voting period.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 1:54:44 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 3:13:18 PM, U.n wrote:
Upon rereading I don't think what you are saying here is unreasonable. If it's a single forfeited turn in a high quality debate, then a "FF" really shouldn't suffice.

And therefore my hypothetical example provided above of one debater going all out and the other forfeiting four turns really doesn't apply.

Personally I view high quality debates differently than low quality debates. "Quality" being based upon the amount of perceived effort put in collectively by both debaters, and obviously perception is subjective. The amount of effort that I put into a vote generally correlates to the quality of the debate. I won't say directly correlates because I'm sure there have been outliers and perception once again is subjective.

I agree... Effort is important. DDO is built on effort, and therefore effort must be rewarded with more effort.

I'm willing to keep this forum in mind when voting on higher quality debates but I make no such promises on lower quality debates such as the hypothetical example that I previously stated.

I wanted to ask if you'd join the VU, but you already offered to join.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 7:15:23 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 5:28:31 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

"The sources, S&G and conduct points are just nonsense"

I like Sourcing... Aside from that, amen.

I think sources should be a critical part of the arguments points decision, as opposed to them being a separate point group.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 7:37:10 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/6/2016 7:15:23 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:28:31 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

"The sources, S&G and conduct points are just nonsense"

I like Sourcing... Aside from that, amen.

I think sources should be a critical part of the arguments points decision, as opposed to them being a separate point group.

So long as others can, and do, use Conduct and S&G, I like my vote mattering. When everyone else is using 5 or even 6 points in a vote, only being able to justifiably use 3 isn't okay to me. That's why the VU's rules don't outlaw Sourcing.

If the other side could only use Arguments, then sure. Although, while they are open, I have found debates where Sourcing becomes a separate, but equally important part of a debate. MW is a good example... I have seen debates where neither sides arguments where better... But one's sources were far better and more empirical... Couldn't justify giving him better arguments, because they weren't better...

Eitherway, if it weren't for others having access to 7 points of voting impact, I'd argue with you.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/6/2016 7:47:27 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/6/2016 7:37:10 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/6/2016 7:15:23 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:28:31 AM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2016 5:11:08 AM, tejretics wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

"The sources, S&G and conduct points are just nonsense"

I like Sourcing... Aside from that, amen.

I think sources should be a critical part of the arguments points decision, as opposed to them being a separate point group.

So long as others can, and do, use Conduct and S&G, I like my vote mattering. When everyone else is using 5 or even 6 points in a vote, only being able to justifiably use 3 isn't okay to me. That's why the VU's rules don't outlaw Sourcing.

If the other side could only use Arguments, then sure. Although, while they are open, I have found debates where Sourcing becomes a separate, but equally important part of a debate. MW is a good example... I have seen debates where neither sides arguments where better... But one's sources were far better and more empirical... Couldn't justify giving him better arguments, because they weren't better...

Eitherway, if it weren't for others having access to 7 points of voting impact, I'd agree with you.

I think to bring any sort of a change to the system, we should emulate the changes ourselves -- mitigating the negative impacts of their votes could also emanate our own negative impacts.

What I'd suggest is that, if there WAS an impact regarding sources, vote on it only when there *are* such strategic 1-point voters, et cetera.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 8:45:02 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
I am going to revive this issue, because I am starting to see that it is a real problem.

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

Take this debate. Lannan at the time I am writing this post is currently winning by 4 points, which are all individual "Forfeit" related conduct votes. This type of voting behavior means that neither debater get's their arguments read, yet lannan can still win this debate because he was lucky enough to have his opponent forfeit. Since when did the site devolve to the point where moderators allow these type of votes on the basis of them barely meeting criteria?

This is whiteflame's comment: A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct.

This encourages bad voting behaviors and allows people to skim by with debate wins without putting any real effort into being a judge.

I am okay with most voting issues, but I think this needs immediate addressing. I have yet to see a moderator comment here about this.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 9:55:09 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 8:45:02 PM, TUF wrote:
I am going to revive this issue, because I am starting to see that it is a real problem.

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

Take this debate. Lannan at the time I am writing this post is currently winning by 4 points, which are all individual "Forfeit" related conduct votes. This type of voting behavior means that neither debater get's their arguments read, yet lannan can still win this debate because he was lucky enough to have his opponent forfeit. Since when did the site devolve to the point where moderators allow these type of votes on the basis of them barely meeting criteria?

This is whiteflame's comment: A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct.

All I can say is... It's sufficient reason to reward conduct... But not a sufficient reason to award a win. And when all you do is give conduct over a ff, that's what you're doing. Such a vote should be removed.

This encourages bad voting behaviors and allows people to skim by with debate wins without putting any real effort into being a judge.

I am okay with most voting issues, but I think this needs immediate addressing. I have yet to see a moderator comment here about this.

I agree. Have you seen both of the debates I gave as examples? One debate, the only voter who read it gave Pro the arguments points... However, con won because of 4 voters who didn't actually read the debate.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 10:25:05 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 9:55:09 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/9/2016 8:45:02 PM, TUF wrote:
I am going to revive this issue, because I am starting to see that it is a real problem.

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

Take this debate. Lannan at the time I am writing this post is currently winning by 4 points, which are all individual "Forfeit" related conduct votes. This type of voting behavior means that neither debater get's their arguments read, yet lannan can still win this debate because he was lucky enough to have his opponent forfeit. Since when did the site devolve to the point where moderators allow these type of votes on the basis of them barely meeting criteria?

This is whiteflame's comment: A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct.

All I can say is... It's sufficient reason to reward conduct... But not a sufficient reason to award a win. And when all you do is give conduct over a ff, that's what you're doing. Such a vote should be removed.

Yeah. it seems like a big "Fvck you" to the debaters. Even the non-forfeiture doesn't get his argument read or feedback because people can lazily just say "FF".

This encourages bad voting behaviors and allows people to skim by with debate wins without putting any real effort into being a judge.

I am okay with most voting issues, but I think this needs immediate addressing. I have yet to see a moderator comment here about this.

I agree. Have you seen both of the debates I gave as examples? One debate, the only voter who read it gave Pro the arguments points... However, con won because of 4 voters who didn't actually read the debate.

Yeah I saw both of those, it's way ridiculous. There are debates everywhere like this. It's likely how the debate I posted will go too.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 10:43:14 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
Okay so apparently the answer is "That's just the rules". Great guys, problem solved.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 10:48:47 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 10:25:05 PM, TUF wrote:
At 3/9/2016 9:55:09 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/9/2016 8:45:02 PM, TUF wrote:
I am going to revive this issue, because I am starting to see that it is a real problem.

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

Take this debate. Lannan at the time I am writing this post is currently winning by 4 points, which are all individual "Forfeit" related conduct votes. This type of voting behavior means that neither debater get's their arguments read, yet lannan can still win this debate because he was lucky enough to have his opponent forfeit. Since when did the site devolve to the point where moderators allow these type of votes on the basis of them barely meeting criteria?

This is whiteflame's comment: A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct.

All I can say is... It's sufficient reason to reward conduct... But not a sufficient reason to award a win. And when all you do is give conduct over a ff, that's what you're doing. Such a vote should be removed.

Yeah. it seems like a big "Fvck you" to the debaters. Even the non-forfeiture doesn't get his argument read or feedback because people can lazily just say "FF".

Yea.. Usually they are only voting because their friend asked them to. It's to make their side/friend win. You put effort and time into your vote, but their bad votes made your time wasted.

This encourages bad voting behaviors and allows people to skim by with debate wins without putting any real effort into being a judge.

I am okay with most voting issues, but I think this needs immediate addressing. I have yet to see a moderator comment here about this.

I agree. Have you seen both of the debates I gave as examples? One debate, the only voter who read it gave Pro the arguments points... However, con won because of 4 voters who didn't actually read the debate.

Yeah I saw both of those, it's way ridiculous. There are debates everywhere like this. It's likely how the debate I posted will go too.

So sad...
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
TUF
Posts: 21,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/9/2016 10:50:57 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/9/2016 10:48:47 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/9/2016 10:25:05 PM, TUF wrote:
At 3/9/2016 9:55:09 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/9/2016 8:45:02 PM, TUF wrote:
I am going to revive this issue, because I am starting to see that it is a real problem.

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

Take this debate. Lannan at the time I am writing this post is currently winning by 4 points, which are all individual "Forfeit" related conduct votes. This type of voting behavior means that neither debater get's their arguments read, yet lannan can still win this debate because he was lucky enough to have his opponent forfeit. Since when did the site devolve to the point where moderators allow these type of votes on the basis of them barely meeting criteria?

This is whiteflame's comment: A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct.

All I can say is... It's sufficient reason to reward conduct... But not a sufficient reason to award a win. And when all you do is give conduct over a ff, that's what you're doing. Such a vote should be removed.

Yeah. it seems like a big "Fvck you" to the debaters. Even the non-forfeiture doesn't get his argument read or feedback because people can lazily just say "FF".

Yea.. Usually they are only voting because their friend asked them to. It's to make their side/friend win. You put effort and time into your vote, but their bad votes made your time wasted.

Exactly.

This encourages bad voting behaviors and allows people to skim by with debate wins without putting any real effort into being a judge.

I am okay with most voting issues, but I think this needs immediate addressing. I have yet to see a moderator comment here about this.

I agree. Have you seen both of the debates I gave as examples? One debate, the only voter who read it gave Pro the arguments points... However, con won because of 4 voters who didn't actually read the debate.

Yeah I saw both of those, it's way ridiculous. There are debates everywhere like this. It's likely how the debate I posted will go too.

So sad...

Well that debate is actually horrible enough where it doesn't matter. But the examples you gave where much more sad.
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
whiteflame
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/10/2016 2:33:19 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
This has been a long-standing rule, but I agree with you both that it presents with some problematic circumstances. You'll likely get some disagreement on this from the general public because it's just simpler to post "FF" with a conduct point, but I agree that that does a disservice to many debaters and results in problematic issues.

The real question is how it should be implemented. At what point do we allow forfeits to determine the outcome of a debate? I get that we can easily do so when there's a full forfeit, that's simple enough. What you seem to be suggesting is that a single round forfeit shouldn't justify the allocation by itself, and we could consider employing that. Should debates with 2 forfeits on a given side wherein a debate still occurred also require a more thorough analysis? And at what point should we consider that a debate has occurred? I'm not saying that we shouldn't do this, just that we have to define the guidelines clearly.