Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

**Tej's Presidential Endorsement (DDO)**

tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:42:25 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
MY ENDORSEMENT

Nearly one year ago, OreEle was DDO's President. Very few of the new users were even aware of that fact, since he had been elected in an interim election following the controversial ban on Imabench and resignation of Mikal in a last-minute (members voted for an interim election rather than appointing Bluesteel, the then-chief-of-staff, President), failed attempt to abolish the Presidency (just as the slight frustrations among a small number of members, such as Mikal and Bluesteel, were rising with respect to Juggle's inactivity), and wasn't very active in Presidential programs. Ore was (and still is) a smart person who apparently knew to deal with Juggle, and had been the site moderator before (alongside Airmax), but he wasn't very active with the community-aspect of the Presidency.

It all started when, nigh-oblivious to me (until Chris told me about it), Juggle updated the mobile version of the site -- a small tweak that was intended to pass a certain Google requirement for "mobile usability," which actually negatively affected the mobile version entirely. Members who used DDO only by mobile were severely affected as being nearly unable to post on forums. At that time, a bunch of petitions were going on, such as a petition to extend the time period for argument posting, but -- obviously -- changing the mobile configuration took precedence, and Chris (1harderthanyouthink) was the first to bring up the issue. Ore and Airmax both took the issue to Juggle via email, and Juggle responded to Ore explaining why they had made the edits to the mobile version. They were initially happy to work with Ore on the issue. But they were *very* unresponsive, and for months, no progress was made whatsoever. Members such as -- most notably -- Bluesteel were frustrated at the lack of progress, and suggested that members report Juggle to Google for SEO abuse, on two separate grounds, namely (1) the hindrance to usability caused by the mobile update, and (2) the existence of the "DDO Reference Section," which was filled with blatant spam. Bluesteel's thread on the same can be viewed here. [http://www.debate.org...]

But Ore decided to take a more passive -- and, at that time, what was viewed to be practical -- approach, actively trying to work with Juggle on fixing the issue. But they eventually became non-responsive. In Ore's own words, "Originally, Juggle seemed responsive and eager to improve the issues. They said they would have an update out within a day or two. This was back in April. However, they kept saying that other things turned up and we kept getting pushed back. Then, they stopped responding altogether." [http://www.debate.org...] Ore said he was leaving the site, and taking Bluesteel's approach by reporting Juggle for SEO abuse, in the hope that at least this would affect the mobile update. Thankfully, it did. Juggle came, fixed the mobile update, removed the reference section, and went away. Debatability became President. She did some community-building activities, which -- to me -- was entirely new since I didn't exactly experience anything in the Ore Presidency. She created "topics of the week" (which have now become Bi-Weekly Topics, run by Chris) and similar exercises. Then, bsh1 and Debatability became the two main campaigns in the next election, standing against each other. Bsh1 was a novel candidate, with interesting ideas to get in touch, and strong support from people like Zaradi, BlackVoid, YYW and other major members.

We voted, in a landslide election, for bsh1. It was clearly a win for him. He came in, and he was a fairly good President (I'm sure almost everyone reading this -- at least people who're into the presidency-related drama now -- was around during bsh1's first term, with only one exception [famousdebater] coming to mind).

It's very hard for me to believe that nearly six months have passed since the controversial election between bsh1 and Wylted. I was very happy with bsh1's performance in his first term, and was actually looking forward to proposed "debate clubs," et cetera, from bsh1's platform. I had been convinced that abolition was a terrible idea by Bladerunner/Airmax in their debate with Mikal/Bluesteel -- obviously that argument was convincing, because it's never easy to defeat Bluesteel. I didn't view abolition as a good idea in any standard.

I was further compelled by the fact that three members I respect a whole lot -- Zaradi, BlackVoid and Saph -- all placed their support to the bsh1 campaign. I expected another landslide victory for bsh1. But Wylted opened a troll campaign on the Religion forum and had a "non-consensual chief-of-staff". Thett announced himself as the candidate for Vice President (that's why he's the Vice President now -- don't be deluded by ColeTrain or Zaradi claiming to be the VP ;P). But" there were Wylted supporters. People like Romanii, who didn't care about the Presidency (seeing it as worthless) and wanting amusement, and people like Subutai, who genuinely believed that the Presidency was harmful and that voting Wylted was the best way to ensure its abolition. I didn't take the abolitionists seriously, and thought that abolishing the Presidency would be disastrous to the site, along with YYW's responses to the anti-Presidency faction. Good times... #fightnazibluecheese

But now -- and this has very little to do with bsh1's second term -- I have come to realize that the site could easily survive without the Presidency. That's how it was during Ore's time. I have realized that there are only two major issues that I care about -- vote standards and user outreach -- and that at no point will abolishing the Presidency go against my views on either subject. I believe that vote standards should remain as they are, or, at the very least, the Instigators should be allowed to opt-in to both current and stricter standards, because I don't want terrible votes on my debates. That isn't going to happen, either. And I believe that Chris/Solon/Hayd's plans for outreach/mentorship are largely ideal. In fact, Hayd's recent thread on DK/TUF was reasonably compelling. But I have clarified with Imabench's campaign that Hayd -- and whomever else he (Hayd, that is) chooses -- will still have full control over the outreach/mentorship programs officially, at least until the first six months.
"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
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:42:42 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
This is not to say that I believe the Presidency has no value whatsoever. Honestly, what would be ideal for me is Chris or DK becoming President to *oversee* programs that are chosen by the community under Conventions. Generally, the problem being Airmax's load on doing that -- somebody to generally assist him with that. (I'm hoping that Airmax will appoint someone capable to help him with that.) But I think the drama generated by the Presidency is a bad thing. That's not to say that drama itself is a bad thing: it can be very productive. But the Presidency-related drama is entirely *personal* and doesn't have anything to do with site policy. The drama between DK and Chris this election has been... tiresome, to say the least. I also believe that the community should have the power to decide what is good for itself, under the eyes of Airmax (and, ideally, a third person). Under this, my debates don't get bad votes, and I get to interact with new members who're pretty cool, and the future of this site. (Missbailey8, Scripturient, nikhilworld123, OreosAreCool, The_Great_Amalgam, and Someloser come to mind.) At the same time, the community decides what will benefit it the most, with the veto of Airmax -- a person we all can trust. As appealing as an idea of a liaison to moderation sounds, I think this is the best system we could have.

Don't get me wrong. I admire both of the other candidates. DK and TUF carry with them a passion to make change, and that passion has been reflected in voting reform recently. I've advised them through their campaign because that fiery passion is what this site needs, and I will *continue* to advise them if they want, because my helping them is irrelevant to my vote. Chris is an incredibly smart person and his idea to redefine the Presidency as a liaison to moderation is very appealing; Hayd's defense of Chris recently is very compelling. But I'm voting for the person whom I think will bring the greatest net benefit to the site, though all three will be, on balance, beneficial. So I don't care whom anyone votes for, because the three of them are all awesome, and I'm happy to help any of you!

And that's why I'm endorsing and voting for Imabench this election.

TL;DR

I admire the passion and sincerity of both DK/TUF and Chris/Solon campaigns, and I'll be happy to see either of them win; I'm open to advise either/both of those campaigns. But I think Imabench's platform is the best one this election despite flaws, so I'm voting Imabench -- sorry to DK and Chris!

---

With best regards,

Tejretics
"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
imabench
Posts: 21,229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:48:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:42:42 PM, tejretics wrote:

And that's why I'm endorsing and voting for Imabench this election.

WOOOOOOOOHOOOHOOOOOO Thank you so much dude omg! :D
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:51:43 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:48:11 PM, imabench wrote:
WOOOOOOOOHOOOHOOOOOO Thank you so much dude omg! :D

Cheers :)
"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
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 4:57:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
So this is how the presidency dies, with a thunderous applause.
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...
imabench
Posts: 21,229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:05:03 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:57:23 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
So this is how the presidency dies, with a thunderous applause.

Oh first im Donald Trump now im frickin Darth Sidious?

I love it, keep it up! XD
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:06:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:05:03 PM, imabench wrote:
At 5/31/2016 4:57:23 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
So this is how the presidency dies, with a thunderous applause.

Oh first im Donald Trump now im frickin Darth Sidious?

I love it, keep it up! XD
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...
rosaliesecretadmiror
Posts: 45
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:17:30 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:57:23 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
So this is how the presidency dies, with a thunderous applause.

you should leave
fire_wings
Posts: 5,563
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:20:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:42:42 PM, tejretics wrote:
This is not to say that I believe the Presidency has no value whatsoever. Honestly, what would be ideal for me is Chris or DK becoming President to *oversee* programs that are chosen by the community under Conventions. Generally, the problem being Airmax's load on doing that -- somebody to generally assist him with that. (I'm hoping that Airmax will appoint someone capable to help him with that.) But I think the drama generated by the Presidency is a bad thing. That's not to say that drama itself is a bad thing: it can be very productive. But the Presidency-related drama is entirely *personal* and doesn't have anything to do with site policy. The drama between DK and Chris this election has been... tiresome, to say the least. I also believe that the community should have the power to decide what is good for itself, under the eyes of Airmax (and, ideally, a third person). Under this, my debates don't get bad votes, and I get to interact with new members who're pretty cool, and the future of this site. (Missbailey8, Scripturient, nikhilworld123, OreosAreCool, The_Great_Amalgam, and Someloser come to mind.) At the same time, the community decides what will benefit it the most, with the veto of Airmax -- a person we all can trust. As appealing as an idea of a liaison to moderation sounds, I think this is the best system we could have.

Don't get me wrong. I admire both of the other candidates. DK and TUF carry with them a passion to make change, and that passion has been reflected in voting reform recently. I've advised them through their campaign because that fiery passion is what this site needs, and I will *continue* to advise them if they want, because my helping them is irrelevant to my vote. Chris is an incredibly smart person and his idea to redefine the Presidency as a liaison to moderation is very appealing; Hayd's defense of Chris recently is very compelling. But I'm voting for the person whom I think will bring the greatest net benefit to the site, though all three will be, on balance, beneficial. So I don't care whom anyone votes for, because the three of them are all awesome, and I'm happy to help any of you!

And that's why I'm endorsing and voting for Imabench this election.

TL;DR

: I admire the passion and sincerity of both DK/TUF and Chris/Solon campaigns, and I'll be happy to see either of them win; I'm open to advise either/both of those campaigns. But I think Imabench's platform is the best one this election despite flaws, so I'm voting Imabench -- sorry to DK and Chris!

---

With best regards,

Tejretics

you are happy to see them win, but you vote imabench?
#ALLHAILFIRETHEKINGOFTHEMISCFORUM

...it's not a new policy... it's just that DDO was built on an ancient burial ground, and that means the spirits of old rise again to cause us problems sometimes- Airmax1227

Wtf you must have an IQ of 250 if you're 11 and already decent at this- 16k

Go to sleep!!!!- missmozart

So to start off, I never committed suicide- Vaarka
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:21:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:20:39 PM, fire_wings wrote:

I would be *more* happy to see Imabench win.

The same logic applies to the reason I voted you down in your debate with missbailey8 -- she was unpersuasive, but you were *more* unpersuasive.
"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
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:29:54 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:42:25 PM, tejretics wrote:

You say that the site can survive without the presidency, which isn't compelling given that if the site could do *better* with the presidency then the reason falls.

You then state that outreach will be maintained under imabench's presidency, as well as the other programs. But this isn't a reason to vote imabench. If both tickets offer the same thing (new user outreach), then that isn't a reason to vote on over the other. Just as you don't have any reason to choose the identical apple on the left over the identical apple on the right.

The differing characteristic you bring up is drama. Thus, since the *only* differing characteristic is drama, then that is the *only* support for your decision.

First of all this isn't an issue for the presidency, this is an issue with the people. Just as if two toddlers got mad at eachother on a playground set over who can use the slide first, you wouldn't put any fault on the playground, you would put fault on the kids. There are many candidates that go through the presidency without drama, and there are those that do. It doesn't have to do with the presidency, it has to do with the people. So this isn't a reason to abolish the presidency.

Furthermore, the alternative form, DDO conventions, does not suggest a difference in the amount of drama at all. The same aspects of the presidency that cause drama (elections) are still prevalent in DDO conventions. Thus its reasonable that the same amount of drama will stay.

The DDO conventions suggest even more drama because of the ability to ban someone by community majority vote. What could possibly create more drama than that!
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:31:49 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:29:54 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/31/2016 4:42:25 PM, tejretics wrote:

You say that the site can survive without the presidency, which isn't compelling given that if the site could do *better* with the presidency then the reason falls.

You then state that outreach will be maintained under imabench's presidency, as well as the other programs. But this isn't a reason to vote imabench. If both tickets offer the same thing (new user outreach), then that isn't a reason to vote on over the other. Just as you don't have any reason to choose the identical apple on the left over the identical apple on the right.

The differing characteristic you bring up is drama. Thus, since the *only* differing characteristic is drama, then that is the *only* support for your decision.

First of all this isn't an issue for the presidency, this is an issue with the people. Just as if two toddlers got mad at eachother on a playground set over who can use the slide first, you wouldn't put any fault on the playground, you would put fault on the kids. There are many candidates that go through the presidency without drama, and there are those that do. It doesn't have to do with the presidency, it has to do with the people. So this isn't a reason to abolish the presidency.

Furthermore, the alternative form, DDO conventions, does not suggest a difference in the amount of drama at all. The same aspects of the presidency that cause drama (elections) are still prevalent in DDO conventions. Thus its reasonable that the same amount of drama will stay.

The DDO conventions suggest even more drama because of the ability to ban someone by community majority vote. What could possibly create more drama than that!

You basically completely misrepresented my post...

I had two fundamental arguments. (1) The drama generated by the Presidency is *pointless,* while the drama Conventions will generate will be based inherently on site policy -- and that form of drama is *good* for the site. (2) Conventions give the community the power to decide what's best for them, which is better than what any individual can decide.

You've misrepresented point #1, and dropped point #2.
"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
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:36:18 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:31:49 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/31/2016 5:29:54 PM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/31/2016 4:42:25 PM, tejretics wrote:

You say that the site can survive without the presidency, which isn't compelling given that if the site could do *better* with the presidency then the reason falls.

You then state that outreach will be maintained under imabench's presidency, as well as the other programs. But this isn't a reason to vote imabench. If both tickets offer the same thing (new user outreach), then that isn't a reason to vote on over the other. Just as you don't have any reason to choose the identical apple on the left over the identical apple on the right.

The differing characteristic you bring up is drama. Thus, since the *only* differing characteristic is drama, then that is the *only* support for your decision.

First of all this isn't an issue for the presidency, this is an issue with the people. Just as if two toddlers got mad at eachother on a playground set over who can use the slide first, you wouldn't put any fault on the playground, you would put fault on the kids. There are many candidates that go through the presidency without drama, and there are those that do. It doesn't have to do with the presidency, it has to do with the people. So this isn't a reason to abolish the presidency.

Furthermore, the alternative form, DDO conventions, does not suggest a difference in the amount of drama at all. The same aspects of the presidency that cause drama (elections) are still prevalent in DDO conventions. Thus its reasonable that the same amount of drama will stay.

The DDO conventions suggest even more drama because of the ability to ban someone by community majority vote. What could possibly create more drama than that!

You basically completely misrepresented my post...

I had two fundamental arguments. (1) The drama generated by the Presidency is *pointless,* while the drama Conventions will generate will be based inherently on site policy -- and that form of drama is *good* for the site.

Where was this in your post? I just read through it again and couldn't find where you said it

(2) Conventions give the community the power to decide what's best for them, which is better than what any individual can decide.

Hmmm, lemme think about this and get back to you. Even if this point is true I think the negatives would outweigh the bad, but I gotta think about it
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:37:54 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:36:18 PM, Hayd wrote:
Where was this in your post? I just read through it again and couldn't find where you said it

"But I think the drama generated by the Presidency is a bad thing. That's not to say that drama itself is a bad thing: it can be very productive. But the Presidency-related drama is entirely *personal* and doesn't have anything to do with site policy. The drama between DK and Chris this election has been... tiresome, to say the least."

Hmmm, lemme think about this and get back to you. Even if this point is true I think the negatives would outweigh the bad, but I gotta think about it

There's literally no actual negative to the Convention system that I can think of.
"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
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:46:43 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:37:54 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/31/2016 5:36:18 PM, Hayd wrote:
Where was this in your post? I just read through it again and couldn't find where you said it

"But I think the drama generated by the Presidency is a bad thing. That's not to say that drama itself is a bad thing: it can be very productive. But the Presidency-related drama is entirely *personal* and doesn't have anything to do with site policy. The drama between DK and Chris this election has been... tiresome, to say the least."

Hmmm, lemme think about this and get back to you. Even if this point is true I think the negatives would outweigh the bad, but I gotta think about it

There's literally no actual negative to the Convention system that I can think of.

Besides the community voting to ban someone
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 5:47:57 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 5:37:54 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/31/2016 5:36:18 PM, Hayd wrote:
Where was this in your post? I just read through it again and couldn't find where you said it

"But I think the drama generated by the Presidency is a bad thing. That's not to say that drama itself is a bad thing: it can be very productive. But the Presidency-related drama is entirely *personal* and doesn't have anything to do with site policy. The drama between DK and Chris this election has been... tiresome, to say the least."

I read that but I didn't see the argument that DDO convention drama would only be about policy, I guess its *implied* when you say "doesn't have anything to do with site policy" didn't pick up on it though, my bad
imabench
Posts: 21,229
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:38:40 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Just gonna stick this right here http://www.debate.org...
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:47:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 4:42:25 PM, tejretics wrote:
MY ENDORSEMENT

I'm a lazy person so can I endorse your endorsement? :D
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:48:57 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Basically, if we take away a source of drama, the members here will find a way to create it anyway.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:50:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

Is the drama more useful in a popularity contest or in debating several different policies?
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 6:53:21 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 6:50:09 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

Is the drama more useful in a popularity contest or in debating several different policies?

Part of the Rosalie drama was on a policy point (trusting the programs to her), and the more personal aspect was my view that the deal in its concept was immoral. Regardless, I have very little hope that the conventions will make drama more about policy.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:02:54 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

I agree that drama is going to happen on this site no matter what, but the sort of drama surrounding the presidency is, I think, much less productive than the sort of drama we'll get in DDO conventions. At least, if we abolish the presidency, we won't have to worry about drama surrounding the abolition of the presidency any more.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:03:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 7:02:54 PM, Diqiucun_Cunmin wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

I agree that drama is going to happen on this site no matter what, but the sort of drama surrounding the presidency is, I think, much less productive than the sort of drama we'll get in DDO conventions. At least, if we abolish the presidency, we won't have to worry about drama surrounding the abolition of the presidency any more.

Eh. I wouldn't be so sure.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 7:07:53 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 6:53:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:50:09 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

Is the drama more useful in a popularity contest or in debating several different policies?

Part of the Rosalie drama was on a policy point (trusting the programs to her), and the more personal aspect was my view that the deal in its concept was immoral. Regardless, I have very little hope that the conventions will make drama more about policy.

I can personally vouch that famous could run the programs he is put in charge of fine. Rosalie seems to want to make new programs, so whatever with that, but I mean the source of drama in conventions would atleast have it's heart in the right place where the drama behind what is honestly a popularity contest is not for a good reason.

Why was it unethical for DK to allow Rosalie to help his administration? I just don't see it. Should he reject help from former candidates merely because they were opponents? Should he not be able to see past their differences to work together?

You know a lot of stuff goes on behind closed doors. Almost as soon as DK announced I talked to him in a PM. I told him I definitely wanted to bring him and Tuf on my team should we win so they could still accomplish their most important policy objectives.

I also requested that should I lose they allow Famous and Rosalie to work with them. Rosalie was not offerred a spot to quit, she wasbpractically gairunteed a spot in his administration whether she continued to run or not.

Had I won I would have also worked with Bench to see some version of his system be put in place because of the demand for it, and because as I stated publicly before, the president's role was becoming too active.

There was no deal between Rosalie and DK. Rosalie and DK were always going to work together regardless of how the election turned out, the fact she quit just brought it to fruition sooner
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 8:08:32 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/31/2016 7:07:53 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:53:21 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:50:09 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 5/31/2016 6:47:39 PM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
I fully respect your assessment, and in large part I agree - but I think that the benefit of the Presidency to the ability to make a structured mentoring program outweighs ridding the site of Presidential drama - especially since drama is going to happen on this site no matter what. What matters is not the source but how we use drama to our benefit in future interactions. That's where my main disagreement with your line of thought is.

Is the drama more useful in a popularity contest or in debating several different policies?

Part of the Rosalie drama was on a policy point (trusting the programs to her), and the more personal aspect was my view that the deal in its concept was immoral. Regardless, I have very little hope that the conventions will make drama more about policy.

I can personally vouch that famous could run the programs he is put in charge of fine. Rosalie seems to want to make new programs, so whatever with that, but I mean the source of drama in conventions would atleast have it's heart in the right place where the drama behind what is honestly a popularity contest is not for a good reason.

Why was it unethical for DK to allow Rosalie to help his administration? I just don't see it. Should he reject help from former candidates merely because they were opponents? Should he not be able to see past their differences to work together?

My argument was that the ethics issue comes in where you throw a bone (programs) in exchange for endorsement.

You know a lot of stuff goes on behind closed doors. Almost as soon as DK announced I talked to him in a PM. I told him I definitely wanted to bring him and Tuf on my team should we win so they could still accomplish their most important policy objectives.

In exchange for endorsement though?

I also requested that should I lose they allow Famous and Rosalie to work with them. Rosalie was not offerred a spot to quit, she wasbpractically gairunteed a spot in his administration whether she continued to run or not.

Had I won I would have also worked with Bench to see some version of his system be put in place because of the demand for it, and because as I stated publicly before, the president's role was becoming too active.

There was no deal between Rosalie and DK. Rosalie and DK were always going to work together regardless of how the election turned out, the fact she quit just brought it to fruition sooner

I don't have a problem with them working together, I have a problem with the endorsement issue. In fact, what you said you requested of DK raises more questions in my mind, but I guess it's a moot point now.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2016 9:11:27 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
My argument was that the ethics issue comes in where you throw a bone (programs) in exchange for endorsement.

That is not what happened though. She was going over to that team no matter what assuming they won. You werebnot running yet, she is pro presidency, clearly she will endorse DK at that point, and dropping out of tge race actually brings a lot of pressure to endorse somebody, so not endorsing somebody is a hard option to take. There was no deal like you imagine, if you want I can copy and paste PM's from when DK first announced his presidency where I beg him to work with Rosalie should we lose.

You know a lot of stuff goes on behind closed doors. Almost as soon as DK announced I talked to him in a PM. I told him I definitely wanted to bring him and Tuf on my team should we win so they could still accomplish their most important policy objectives.

In exchange for endorsement though?

Not what happened, I am sorry if that was the sole reason you are running and you are attached to that point of view though.

I also requested that should I lose they allow Famous and Rosalie to work with them. Rosalie was not offerred a spot to quit, she wasbpractically gairunteed a spot in his administration whether she continued to run or not.

Had I won I would have also worked with Bench to see some version of his system be put in place because of the demand for it, and because as I stated publicly before, the president's role was becoming too active.

There was no deal between Rosalie and DK. Rosalie and DK were always going to work together regardless of how the election turned out, the fact she quit just brought it to fruition sooner

I don't have a problem with them working together, I have a problem with the endorsement issue. In fact, what you said you requested of DK raises more questions in my mind, but I guess it's a moot point now.

Why would that raise more questions. If you win, I hope you realize that DK's supporters and Bench's supporters represebt major factions in this site, and that you would be willing to work with thembto amend your pre presidential platform, so that we can make all parties happy.

If you are not vehind the scenes making some deals with the other major campaigns right now you are making a mistake. It is one thing to be at war in public, but there should be massive cooperation behind the scenes. You all care about the site, you will all improve. If you think that DK or Bench are your enemies and you will ignore the needsbof their supporters, I seriously question your maturity. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you will grow into the role though.
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 12:18:10 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
Two issues: irony, and sadness.

I. Irony

I think the idea of voting for a president to abolish the presidency is nonsensical. Doing the thing that causes the consequence you don't want, because you don't want to bring about the consequence, makes no sense. Consider the following:

I want to shoot up some heroin to cure my heroin addiction!

It is very important to eat a well balanced diet of Big Macs and Milkshakes to remain healthy.

Nothing like a good old cigarette to help me stop smoking!

Let's go to war to ensure perpetual world peace!

Nothing like a good old fashioned genocide against the Hutus to guarantee the Hutus' ongoing safety, security and prosperity.

I have decided to eat this cake, so that I don't eat this cake.

II. Sadness

It makes me sad that voting standards are what they are, mainly because I have literally no confidence in anyone to do them correctly, other than Addison, and other people who aren't around anymore.

The more complicated the standards are, the more they tend to get screwed up. Whiteflame can't even get the simple standard right; much less the more complicated one.

BOT does all this work now... but really to what end? We have the ideal standards, but should the remedy for a bad vote be a mod? No. It should be another vote.

It's one thing to have bad votes removed, if your only consideration is with respect to the debate at hand. My concern, however, is with both the debate at hand, and the longterm participation in overall voting among all members.

While BOT seems to competently both interpret and apply the standards, while mentoring noobs in the way of not casting entirely sh!t ballots; whiteflame failed to correctly even understand the simple standards, while failing to apply them, which caused--when and to the extent that he tried to work with people on improving their votes--tremendous outrage, frustration, and other general unpleasantness because whiteflame just got sloppy (because he had too much on his plate).

When he had time (i.e. when not a mod) to not fvck sh!t up, he did a pretty good job voting. But it took him hours. Like, hugely long periods of time. Time that a'int no body got; myself included. (Note: I usually spend between 30-45 min reading a debate and writing an RFD, but it's obvious that my brain works faster and more accurately than whitelfame's. I've got a ferrari; he's pushing a lada.) This makes me sad.

It makes me sad because people want to contribute, but then they got all fvcked up with whiteflame who didn't know how to explain the difference between a claim, warrant, or impact; who couldn't distinguish between how to be an interventionist judge or not be an interventionist judge; who had to work faster and cut corners; who failed to understand literal words before him; and who continually and ongoingly angered the people he "mentored" in the way of voting, to the same effect of pissing people off all the time, and consequentially depressing/chilling votes. So sad.

While BOT has unfvcked whiteflame's disaster (he literally sh!t the bed), BOT too will at some point move on with his life. Where does that leave DDO? With three options, obviously: (1) hope that someone good is around and wants to do the job (not likely); or (2) go back to where we started with Max doing all of this sh!t (dumb, b/c he has more important sh!t to do); or (3) down with the system (least worst maybe?).

All of that I say to say this... the end of voting moderation is near, either because it will be catastrophically mismanaged (e.g. by someone who is similarly as slow as whiteflame), it will fall on Max (which would be bad for site overall), or it will crash and burn; if someone who is both competent and willing fails to present themselves.

I'm not going to fvcking do it, b/c I don't have the will or the time. I might be willing to train someone to do it, but Addison can do that when he leaves so got that covered. Problem is that there will be no one to train. (Maybe BOT trains whiteflame? Not likely to work, b/c whiteflame is too dumb to understand stuff.)

All so very sad.

Ergo... irony and sadness. Such irony and sadness.
Tsar of DDO
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2016 1:52:10 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/1/2016 12:18:10 AM, YYW wrote:
Two issues: irony, and sadness.

I. Irony

I think the idea of voting for a president to abolish the presidency is nonsensical. Doing the thing that causes the consequence you don't want, because you don't want to bring about the consequence, makes no sense. Consider the following:

I want to shoot up some heroin to cure my heroin addiction!

It is very important to eat a well balanced diet of Big Macs and Milkshakes to remain healthy.

Nothing like a good old cigarette to help me stop smoking!

Let's go to war to ensure perpetual world peace!

Nothing like a good old fashioned genocide against the Hutus to guarantee the Hutus' ongoing safety, security and prosperity.

I have decided to eat this cake, so that I don't eat this cake.
I can't speak for Tej, but abolishing the presidency is merely a means the end of reducing drama to me. It's not that I'm philosophically opposed to the presidency, in which case it would certainly be ironic.
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...