Total Posts:13|Showing Posts:1-13
Jump to topic:

Voting standards

FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.

I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?

How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 2:57:42 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.

I'm not sure if you are intentionally strawmanning the factors that lead to someone losing their voting privileges of you simply don't know, so I'll do my best to explain it.

Firstly, no one has ever lost their voting privileges because their vote was reported. Now, if their vote is reported and removed, and then they have a few others removed it is considered, but before that, we do our best to contact the person and discuss the voting standards with them.

This is however complicated by the fact that a lot of people have messages blocked and we can't contact them right away. We do make every attempt to do so though, but if someone is placing many bad votes without any evidence of improvement, and without the ability for us to speak to them, then their voting privileges are likely to be removed.

So to sum up, a members voting privileges are only removed after several votes are removed, and more likely, after a pattern of poor voting conduct is shown. Further, before removing voting privileges, we (Mostly BoT these days, and he should be commended for his efforts) attempt to talk to them about the standards, and if they improve, we don't even consider removing their voting privileges. In other words, voting privilege removal is a final attempt to rectify a situation when someone has been given enough opportunities and we have either failed to be able speak with them, or they have failed to comply.

I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?

I don't really understand the point of this. Though I have heard an argument that only the debaters themselves should be able to report votes on their debate, and I think that might have merit.


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report

I'm not the one to best make the arguments for this, but writing a proper RFD isn't really that complicated. I mean, if someone wants to award all 7 point, then yeah, it becomes a more time consuming process because they are writing their RFD to fit with the points they want to allow. But if someone goes in with just trying to properly award argument points, it's very straight forward to do so... And if they want to award the other points where there is an obvious reason to do so, then providing an explanation for that should be easy as well.

and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

You are correct, there is no consequence for reporting a vote.
Debate.org Moderator
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.
Debate.org Moderator
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:01:57 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.

They might be required to be very clear about why it is not up to the standard, and that objection published with the mods post to the comments.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:08:35 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:01:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.

They might be required to be very clear about why it is not up to the standard, and that objection published with the mods post to the comments.

The comments they make that are included with the report are usually included in the moderation PM, and sometimes the reason for removal or non-removal will speak to that specifically. Though I would say that at least half the time no comments are provided and just a reason for the report is given. On the other hand, I would say the majority of reports on votes are for obvious reasons, and therefore just selecting "vote bomb" is sufficient because anyone at a glance can see that it's not a sufficient vote and why.

Perhaps there would be merit to this for the more gray area votes though, and not the obvious vote bombs.
Debate.org Moderator
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:13:28 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:08:35 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:01:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.

They might be required to be very clear about why it is not up to the standard, and that objection published with the mods post to the comments.

The comments they make that are included with the report are usually included in the moderation PM, and sometimes the reason for removal or non-removal will speak to that specifically. Though I would say that at least half the time no comments are provided and just a reason for the report is given. On the other hand, I would say the majority of reports on votes are for obvious reasons, and therefore just selecting "vote bomb" is sufficient because anyone at a glance can see that it's not a sufficient vote and why.

Perhaps there would be merit to this for the more gray area votes though, and not the obvious vote bombs.

I think that is where we are talking. CLear vote bombs are... clear. You would know how many votes are flagged, and how many are rejected. I don't know the percentage, but it would seem that tossing stones at voters with no real responsibility from the reporting user is unfair.
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,235
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:23:45 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:57:42 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.

I'm not sure if you are intentionally strawmanning the factors that lead to someone losing their voting privileges of you simply don't know, so I'll do my best to explain it.

Firstly, no one has ever lost their voting privileges because their vote was reported.

"solely" reported. Not sure how that makes things much better, though.

Now, if their vote is reported and removed, and then they have a few others removed it is considered, but before that, we do our best to contact the person and discuss the voting standards with them.

Hm. This was not my immediate experience. I would just LURVE to justify this, and demonstrate that how the "best" resulted in the revocation of privilege after one reviewed and reported vote, however it has been under no uncertain terms related to me that posting the contents of such a message constitutes a TOS violation. To be fair, and not to strawman a position, this was one moderator many many moons ago, and the most recent threat was bullied/convinced that such a threat of revocation of voting was ill executed might very well be different policy.

This is however complicated by the fact that a lot of people have messages blocked and we can't contact them right away. We do make every attempt to do so though, but if someone is placing many bad votes without any evidence of improvement, and without the ability for us to speak to them, then their voting privileges are likely to be removed.

.... how is that going to fix the problem? Block the account. Would it be safe to say that the same collection of people that do not allow for messages seem to vote only a specific direction on any given subject, or perhaps have a favored voting trend? I get its a bit of a pain to research, but I humbly suggest you have a likely scenario of a dummy account.

So to sum up, a members voting privileges are only removed after several votes are removed....

Personal experience trends otherwise. I don't want to call such a situation unique.

and more likely, after a pattern of poor voting conduct is shown. Further, before removing voting privileges, we (Mostly BoT these days, and he should be commended for his efforts) attempt to talk to them about the standards, and if they improve, we don't even consider removing their voting privileges. In other words, voting privilege removal is a final attempt to rectify a situation when someone has been given enough opportunities and we have either failed to be able speak with them, or they have failed to comply.

I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?

I don't really understand the point of this

Its pretty simple, really. If there is a consequence to superfluous action, it stops the action.

Though I have heard an argument that only the debaters themselves should be able to report votes on their debate, and I think that might have merit.

As do I.


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report

I'm not the one to best make the arguments for this, but writing a proper RFD isn't really that complicated.

I agree. Makes one wonder why we have mods and stickies on the subject, though.

I mean, if someone wants to award all 7 point, then yeah, it becomes a more time consuming process because they are writing their RFD to fit with the points they want to allow. But if someone goes in with just trying to properly award argument points, it's very straight forward to do so... And if they want to award the other points where there is an obvious reason to do so, then providing an explanation for that should be easy as well.

Heh. "Obvious". I am thankful you said this, really. I would be happy to clue you in and provide context as to why, but, TOS, and removing voting rights, and messaging and all. I am sure you would get a laugh from it.

and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

You are correct, there is no consequence for reporting a vote.

https://www.youtube.com...
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:23:57 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:13:28 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:08:35 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:01:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.

They might be required to be very clear about why it is not up to the standard, and that objection published with the mods post to the comments.

The comments they make that are included with the report are usually included in the moderation PM, and sometimes the reason for removal or non-removal will speak to that specifically. Though I would say that at least half the time no comments are provided and just a reason for the report is given. On the other hand, I would say the majority of reports on votes are for obvious reasons, and therefore just selecting "vote bomb" is sufficient because anyone at a glance can see that it's not a sufficient vote and why.

Perhaps there would be merit to this for the more gray area votes though, and not the obvious vote bombs.

I think that is where we are talking. CLear vote bombs are... clear. You would know how many votes are flagged, and how many are rejected. I don't know the percentage, but it would seem that tossing stones at voters with no real responsibility from the reporting user is unfair.

I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. The consequence of an, at worst, frivolous report, is that a vote isn't removed. The voter doesn't go through any hassle when their vote is reported, and only if their vote is insufficient is there any consequence for it - and then they can resubmit their vote to make it sufficient.

But let's ignore that for a moment, what responsibility should be placed on the reporter? Should we expect that anything other than an obvious vote bomb (something that has to be defined) should come with some minimum of explanation for the report? Should we make vote reporting a public thing? In other words, rather than even using the site report function, perhaps voters should link to the debate and cite which vote they are reporting with an explanation for why it should be removed, in an assigned vote report thread?

I'm willing to discuss those ideas and consider them, but I'm wondering what exactly you think "reporter responsibility" looks like in the end.
Debate.org Moderator
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:27:55 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:23:57 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:13:28 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:08:35 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:01:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 3:00:03 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:10 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.



I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report, and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

I had thought about this subject generally. Flagging requires virtually NO justification and is anonymous. Considering the current standard for voting, it seems fair that objecting should have responsibilities too.

Worth a discussion for sure.

I'm not really sure I understand the point. Someone thinks a vote is insufficient, or just wants to see what the review will say about it, so they report it. I'm not sure how much responsibility should be required there.

They might be required to be very clear about why it is not up to the standard, and that objection published with the mods post to the comments.

The comments they make that are included with the report are usually included in the moderation PM, and sometimes the reason for removal or non-removal will speak to that specifically. Though I would say that at least half the time no comments are provided and just a reason for the report is given. On the other hand, I would say the majority of reports on votes are for obvious reasons, and therefore just selecting "vote bomb" is sufficient because anyone at a glance can see that it's not a sufficient vote and why.

Perhaps there would be merit to this for the more gray area votes though, and not the obvious vote bombs.

I think that is where we are talking. CLear vote bombs are... clear. You would know how many votes are flagged, and how many are rejected. I don't know the percentage, but it would seem that tossing stones at voters with no real responsibility from the reporting user is unfair.

I'm not sure I understand why that would be unfair. The consequence of an, at worst, frivolous report, is that a vote isn't removed. The voter doesn't go through any hassle when their vote is reported, and only if their vote is insufficient is there any consequence for it - and then they can resubmit their vote to make it sufficient.

But let's ignore that for a moment, what responsibility should be placed on the reporter? Should we expect that anything other than an obvious vote bomb (something that has to be defined) should come with some minimum of explanation for the report? Should we make vote reporting a public thing? In other words, rather than even using the site report function, perhaps voters should link to the debate and cite which vote they are reporting with an explanation for why it should be removed, in an assigned vote report thread?

I'm willing to discuss those ideas and consider them, but I'm wondering what exactly you think "reporter responsibility" looks like in the end.

I think that might be a good idea.

As noted in the OP, voters who have gone to the trouble of voting might have privileges removed. There is some risk there, and the ones reporting have no risk. They don't even have to really explain what the issue is.
airmax1227
Posts: 13,244
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 3:36:14 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:23:45 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:57:42 AM, airmax1227 wrote:
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.

I'm not sure if you are intentionally strawmanning the factors that lead to someone losing their voting privileges of you simply don't know, so I'll do my best to explain it.

Firstly, no one has ever lost their voting privileges because their vote was reported.

"solely" reported. Not sure how that makes things much better, though.

Now, if their vote is reported and removed, and then they have a few others removed it is considered, but before that, we do our best to contact the person and discuss the voting standards with them.

Hm. This was not my immediate experience. I would just LURVE to justify this, and demonstrate that how the "best" resulted in the revocation of privilege after one reviewed and reported vote, however it has been under no uncertain terms related to me that posting the contents of such a message constitutes a TOS violation. To be fair, and not to strawman a position, this was one moderator many many moons ago, and the most recent threat was bullied/convinced that such a threat of revocation of voting was ill executed might very well be different policy.

You should consider PMing with the details of this because I don't know what you are talking about. Even so, there are obviously going to be exceptions, but as a general rule, people don't lose their voting privileges too quickly if it can be avoided.

This is however complicated by the fact that a lot of people have messages blocked and we can't contact them right away. We do make every attempt to do so though, but if someone is placing many bad votes without any evidence of improvement, and without the ability for us to speak to them, then their voting privileges are likely to be removed.

.... how is that going to fix the problem? Block the account. Would it be safe to say that the same collection of people that do not allow for messages seem to vote only a specific direction on any given subject, or perhaps have a favored voting trend? I get its a bit of a pain to research, but I humbly suggest you have a likely scenario of a dummy account.

This isn't what is going on and you have apparently misunderstood. The default account setting is to have messages blocked to everyone but friends. Therefore, when a voter is put on our radar, we send friend requests immediately so that we can contact them (there's a reason I have as many "friends" on this site as I do). Sometimes though, people refuse to accept those friend request, so we can't contact them (through common means), they continue to vote, and so we have no choice but to remove their voting privileges.

So to sum up, a members voting privileges are only removed after several votes are removed....

Personal experience trends otherwise. I don't want to call such a situation unique.

Again, I don't know what your personal experience is aside from the fact that you haven't had your voting privileges removed. If you want to speak to something specific, but don't want to say here, I invite you to send me a PM.

and more likely, after a pattern of poor voting conduct is shown. Further, before removing voting privileges, we (Mostly BoT these days, and he should be commended for his efforts) attempt to talk to them about the standards, and if they improve, we don't even consider removing their voting privileges. In other words, voting privilege removal is a final attempt to rectify a situation when someone has been given enough opportunities and we have either failed to be able speak with them, or they have failed to comply.

I have a nifty idea. A GRAND idea. How bout we limit voting flag ability? That is to say, if you try and flag a vote, much like voting in a debate, and you get X number of "demerits" according the mods... you don't get to report votes? Or, like voting, you need to "re-up" your ability to flag votes by writing a dissertation or two as to why a vote should be flagged in the first place?

I don't really understand the point of this

Its pretty simple, really. If there is a consequence to superfluous action, it stops the action.

I would say there are some vote reports that aren't necessary, but I don't think there are a significant number of superfluous vote reports. I suppose I could go through the last few months and tabulate the number of removed versus non-removed votes though, to find out the percentage, but off hand I'd say most vote reports are well intended.

Though I have heard an argument that only the debaters themselves should be able to report votes on their debate, and I think that might have merit.

As do I.


How viable does that sound?

How -fair- does that sound?

I say this only because it seems like an RFD is FAR FAR FAR more complicated to ensure it sticks than a report

I'm not the one to best make the arguments for this, but writing a proper RFD isn't really that complicated.

I agree. Makes one wonder why we have mods and stickies on the subject, though.

Well, that's because a lot of people like to abuse the 7 point system. Since it's the default system, and the system people use the most, it means voting is by and large going to be a system done through abuse. Therefore some percent of the DDO community believes we should have the moderation standards on the 7 point system, and that requires we have exhaustive explanations of those standards.

I mean, if someone wants to award all 7 point, then yeah, it becomes a more time consuming process because they are writing their RFD to fit with the points they want to allow. But if someone goes in with just trying to properly award argument points, it's very straight forward to do so... And if they want to award the other points where there is an obvious reason to do so, then providing an explanation for that should be easy as well.

Heh. "Obvious". I am thankful you said this, really. I would be happy to clue you in and provide context as to why, but, TOS, and removing voting rights, and messaging and all. I am sure you would get a laugh from it.

At this point, I'd urge you then to contact me via PM, because there is apparently something I am missing here.

and more over, I don't think there is a consequence for reporting votes. Am I wrong?

You are correct, there is no consequence for reporting a vote.

https://www.youtube.com...

In any case FJ, I appreciate that you have brought up the subject and it's certainly something worth discussing.
Debate.org Moderator
tejretics
Posts: 6,091
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2016 11:44:17 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 2:40:06 AM, FaustianJustice wrote:
Heh, psyche your mind.

Yeah, its a voting thread, but... I was just curious. Apparently, if the mods deem it, your voting privileges can be revoked cause you voted improperly, according to... wait for it...

a reported vote.

Nope, only if (a) the vote is reported, AND (b) the vote is insufficient. If the vote is a good vote, irrespective of whether it is reported you can have your voting privileges.
"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
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2016 4:33:21 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/20/2016 3:23:57 AM, airmax1227 wrote:

But let's ignore that for a moment, what responsibility should be placed on the reporter? Should we expect that anything other than an obvious vote bomb (something that has to be defined) should come with some minimum of explanation for the report? Should we make vote reporting a public thing? In other words, rather than even using the site report function, perhaps voters should link to the debate and cite which vote they are reporting with an explanation for why it should be removed, in an assigned vote report thread?
Great idea!

I'm willing to discuss those ideas and consider them, but I'm wondering what exactly you think "reporter responsibility" looks like in the end.