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

Voting on DDO Complaints/Thoughts

MagicAintReal
Posts: 592
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 6:17:45 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Ok.
As I see it, there are three major problems going on with the voting system.

1. Some voters suck pretty bad at voting.

2. Moderators are forced to consider many votes that suck "sufficient."

3. There is a fundamental disagreement between the people who think voting standards are too strict, and people who think voting standards are too harsh.

1. Bad Voters

This is a message to all bad voters.
SHOW DON'T TELL
Your votes are being removed, because you just assert things about the debate that need to be shown, but you never show them. Yes, in an RFD, like in a paper you may write for academia, you need to provide evidence that SHOWS what you are TELLING in a vote.

Was something convincing?
Ok, what did the debater say, how is it relevant to the topic, why was this relevant thing convincing, and why was the opponent's argument a failure?
If you can SHOW this, your vote will not be removed.

In a conversation in life, if you told me that digital learning is superior to traditional learning, I would ask you why...you can't just TELL me that it's superior, you have to SHOW me some examples/evidence that demonstrate your claim...voting RFDs are no different.
SHOW DON'T TELL.

2. Voting Sufficiency.

To me, requiring voters to SHOW rather than TELL is very simple, but voting standards *aren't* even this strict.

A voter could only view a very minimal part of a debate, SHOW that this particular part was more convincing/showed better conduct/had more reliable sources, and the moderators have to accept it as sufficient.

That's right, under the current voting system, a voter could analyze the conduct of only one debater, provide evidence of this debater's misconduct, ignore the other debater's conduct completely, and vote on conduct sufficiently. Seem fair to you?

Same goes if a voter only reads a portion of the debate. If they SHOW in just one example, how one debater was convincing given the resolution, and ignore the other debater's arguments completely, the vote is still sufficient. Seem fair?

The fact that voters *aren't* required to SHOW evidence for conduct/arguments/sources/S&G, in the total of the debate, requires the moderators to deem otherwise crappy votes as sufficient. Seem reasonable?

I'm aware of the opt-in system, but this seems redundant to me.
All voting should be regulated based on the opt-in system on principle alone.
People shouldn't have to opt-in to have quality RFDs...quality RFDs should be the norm, not the exception.

3. Too soft VS Too harsh.

This is a fun site, and it serves as a hobby, not a full time job, for most if not all of the debaters/voters on the site.
So it follows that since this is for entertainment AND it is not the central part of anyone's life, that the votes need not be so serious, thus votes that ONLY tell and don't show should be considered sufficient, and should not be removed.

VS

This is a debate site, and SHOWING reasons/evidence for everything you claim is an inherent virtue that ALL legit debaters/voters should promote/espouse/support. Allowing RFDs that fail to do this to be sufficient reduces the integrity of the voting system and the quality of responses that debaters seek from their debating brethren.

So...
I say, throw out this idea that a debater needs to opt-in to have quality votes...quality votes should just be the norm, and if a debater feels that this standard is too stringent, then when creating debates, the debater should put that they do not want legit votes.

Otherwise, the standard should just be that the voter must SHOW, within the totality of the debate, evidence/reasons/examples for any and all point allocations (conclusions a voter makes).

The opt-in should be for those who DO NOT want legit votes, not the other way around.

I welcome others' opinions on this...
uniferous
Posts: 37
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2016 7:35:27 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/4/2016 6:17:45 PM, MagicAintReal wrote:
That's right, under the current voting system, a voter could analyze the conduct of only one debater, provide evidence of this debater's misconduct, ignore the other debater's conduct completely, and vote on conduct sufficiently. Seem fair to you?

I'm guessing I know where you got this example from.
#Uniferous