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

Reasons For Decisions - Site Suggestion

askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:12:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Recently Freedo brought up an old suggestion that had been suggested since the josh votebombing. It would solve tons of issues on this site, and would make it an environment where debaters can truly receive good criticism to improve their debating skills. It would significantly increase the quality of votes as well as the validity of them.

I'm talking about the Reason for Decision.

What this would do is require everyone voting to provide a 3-4 sentence explanation of why they voted the way they did on each point before they were allowed to vote.

An example of a Reason for Decision wold be:

Reason for Decision

Agreeing with before and after - Tied - I didn't really care about either as I'm not a mormon and still am not.

Conduct - Con - I believe I had better conduct. I didn't really insult my opponent besides poking fun of his terrible formatting where as he made several insults displayed in my last round. Furthermore my opponent had several arguments that were simply copy and pasted from wikipedia and other websites word for word.

Spelling and Grammar - Con - The use of caps locks and odd formatting by my opponent clearly hurt him as it made his debate hard to read by mostly everyone. Furthermore my grammar was more complex and I made less spelling errors that I observed.

Convincing Arguments - Con - I convinced the debater himself the ultimate form of convincing. Furthermore I made several well constructed points and defended them until the concluding round of the debate.

It would be a huge improvement and most members agree with this change. Even if it isn't mandatory it would be nice for the debate by default to have the reason for decision be mandatory and have the option to toggle this control off when creating the debate.

If you are behind this decision please sign below and include any specifics that I did not include or any other suggestions.

1. Askbob
2.
3.
etc.

Reliable Sources - Con - I used several reliable sources and backed up each point with a direct link, my opponent mainly used wikipedia.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:14:04 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I think the site should make it mandatory. I explained elsewhere how most vote-bombers are new time members who vote all 7 points for the side they agree with, without even reading the debate, then are never to be seen again. Having to offer an explanation would deter this type of vote-bomber.

If an RFD was a mandatory field, people who filled the field in with non-sense could also be reported, making a legitimate appeals process against vote-bombers.

I also liked FREEDO's idea of having a box any voter must check that says, "I certify that I read the entire debate and filled out the RFD in good faith" or something like that.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:21:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 2:14:04 AM, bluesteel wrote:
I think the site should make it mandatory. I explained elsewhere how most vote-bombers are new time members who vote all 7 points for the side they agree with, without even reading the debate, then are never to be seen again. Having to offer an explanation would deter this type of vote-bomber.

If an RFD was a mandatory field, people who filled the field in with non-sense could also be reported, making a legitimate appeals process against vote-bombers.

I also liked FREEDO's idea of having a box any voter must check that says, "I certify that I read the entire debate and filled out the RFD in good faith" or something like that.

I agree with this as well. I just thought we could satisfy everyone by making it mandatory, but this would skew the rankings, so yeah probably mandatory for everyone is best.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:45:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I support this prospect with my fullest fullness.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
JuliaD
Posts: 79
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:09:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Hello everyone,

Thank you for the feedback. We have been discussing options that we could implement to abate vote bombing or potentially eliminate it all together. Implementing a "Reason for Decision" feature is something that many of you have messaged me about and have posted about numerous times, including this thread.

If the general consensus is on board with implementing this type of feature, we can make I happen. While seemingly everyone appears to be on board with this feature, I want to make sure this is in fact what the community wants prior to deciding to implement the feature.

Another layer of functionality that we have been discussing is to prevent multiple votes on a debate from a single IP address. This would prevent the large majority of vote bombers who use multi-accounts to be successful with skewing debate results.

Those are the two options we are currently evaluating to implement in our next release. Ideally, we would put both measures in place with the hopes that vote-bombing would be near eliminated.

Please let me know your thoughts. If this approach has the support of the community, we will do our best to implement it.

Thanks,
Julia
SportsGuru
Posts: 1,648
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:16:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Another vote for RFDs

At 1/22/2011 10:09:15 AM, JuliaD wrote:

Another layer of functionality that we have been discussing is to prevent multiple votes on a debate from a single IP address. This would prevent the large majority of vote bombers who use multi-accounts to be successful with skewing debate results.

The only concern I would have with this is if a school uses the same IP address for all or most of their computers (though admittedly I don't know how common this is), different people would be unable to vote on a debate because a school-mate has already done so. (see geese brothers, usaf, wjm)
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:41:35 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I completely support this. The sooner it's implemented, the better.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
vardas0antras
Posts: 983
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:44:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 8:14:58 AM, mongeese wrote:
I support this.

If you've got the time to read a debate, you have the time to type about it.
"When he awoke in a tomb three days later he would actually have believed that he rose from the dead" FREEDO about the resurrection of Jesus Christ
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 10:51:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 10:16:54 AM, SportsGuru wrote:
Another vote for RFDs

At 1/22/2011 10:09:15 AM, JuliaD wrote:

Another layer of functionality that we have been discussing is to prevent multiple votes on a debate from a single IP address. This would prevent the large majority of vote bombers who use multi-accounts to be successful with skewing debate results.

The only concern I would have with this is if a school uses the same IP address for all or most of their computers (though admittedly I don't know how common this is), different people would be unable to vote on a debate because a school-mate has already done so. (see geese brothers, usaf, wjm)

This is important to note. ^

I do support the RFD amendment, however I'm curious how it will work.

Will it simply be that when you vote, a text box pops up ask for your RFD before continuing? If so, what is to stop a "vote bomber" from simply putting in some kind of generic answer of "well, I thought that PRO did a really good job, so I gave him all 7 points"?

Would RFD's be under evaluation, and potentially rejected based on the RFD? And if so, how can me make sure that the rejections are not misused and abused and ensure fairness?

If it is going to be monitored by the members, I see huge problems with arguing over RFDs, if it is going to be done by admin, then that is going to take a lot of time, given the number of debates that we have.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 11:37:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 10:51:10 AM, OreEle wrote:
If so, what is to stop a "vote bomber" from simply putting in some kind of generic answer of "well, I thought that PRO did a really good job, so I gave him all 7 points"?

Would RFD's be under evaluation, and potentially rejected based on the RFD? And if so, how can me make sure that the rejections are not misused and abused and ensure fairness?

If it is going to be monitored by the members, I see huge problems with arguing over RFDs, if it is going to be done by admin, then that is going to take a lot of time, given the number of debates that we have.

This is an excellent point. I think we should make it clear what kind of RFDs are not acceptable before implementng. Such as: "I think they did good" is not acceptable. People may argue about RFDs, but personally I think they'll improve the system way more than hurt it and may deter some people who don't read the debate from voting.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 11:47:48 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 11:37:55 AM, askbob wrote:
At 1/22/2011 10:51:10 AM, OreEle wrote:
If so, what is to stop a "vote bomber" from simply putting in some kind of generic answer of "well, I thought that PRO did a really good job, so I gave him all 7 points"?

Would RFD's be under evaluation, and potentially rejected based on the RFD? And if so, how can me make sure that the rejections are not misused and abused and ensure fairness?

If it is going to be monitored by the members, I see huge problems with arguing over RFDs, if it is going to be done by admin, then that is going to take a lot of time, given the number of debates that we have.

This is an excellent point. I think we should make it clear what kind of RFDs are not acceptable before implementng. Such as: "I think they did good" is not acceptable. People may argue about RFDs, but personally I think they'll improve the system way more than hurt it and may deter some people who don't read the debate from voting.

That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?

Personally, I focus on the first and final rounds when reading debates, since then go back to the middle if to check people's claims (like when the end with, "my opponent never successfully addressed point B, so that proves me right" I'll then go back and look at point B and any addressing (if needed) that the other person needs. (I'm bad like that).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:11:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If a person isn't willing to type a simple paragraph explaining their vote, they probably didn't read the debate, either, and doesn't even deserve to vote.

RFDs could easily be reported to Juggle for validity. Reporting RFDs that shouldn't be reported would result in consequences. Juggle would be the ultimate judge.
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:19:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 10:16:54 AM, SportsGuru wrote:
Another vote for RFDs

At 1/22/2011 10:09:15 AM, JuliaD wrote:

Another layer of functionality that we have been discussing is to prevent multiple votes on a debate from a single IP address. This would prevent the large majority of vote bombers who use multi-accounts to be successful with skewing debate results.

The only concern I would have with this is if a school uses the same IP address for all or most of their computers (though admittedly I don't know how common this is), different people would be unable to vote on a debate because a school-mate has already done so. (see geese brothers, usaf, wjm)

My concern is that I use the same IP address as mongeese.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:20:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?:

Yeah, I suppose that is a problem. I haven't been interested in formal debate in months. I just accepted my first formal debate in nearly 6 months. During that time I think I've voted on maybe 3 debates.

I don't know how to raise interest, but I'll think more about it.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:20:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?:

Yeah, I suppose that is a problem. I haven't been interested in formal debate in months. I just accepted my first formal debate in nearly 6 months. During that time I think I've voted on maybe 3 debates.

I don't know how to raise interest, but I'll think more about it.

Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:41:41 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.

That would be nice. Perhaps there should also be a way to see all debates that a person voted in, including the exact points voted, in a list. This would help in seeking out vote-bombers.
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:43:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:20:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?:

Yeah, I suppose that is a problem. I haven't been interested in formal debate in months. I just accepted my first formal debate in nearly 6 months. During that time I think I've voted on maybe 3 debates.

I don't know how to raise interest, but I'll think more about it.

Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.

This is a great idea again OreEle. Maybe also give rewards for voting/incentives for giving the best critiques. I would rather juggle give that thousand dollars it was going to reward to debaters to people who provide the best critiques. Maybe have other members Give thumbs up and thumbs down to critiques and have a feature where you can sort the critiques by thumbs up and thumbs down.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
askbob
Posts: 7,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:44:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:41:41 PM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.

That would be nice. Perhaps there should also be a way to see all debates that a person voted in, including the exact points voted, in a list. This would help in seeking out vote-bombers.

This is another great idea.
Me -Phil left the site in my charge. I have a recorded phone conversation to prove it.
kohai -If you're the owner, then do something useful like ip block him and get us away from juggle and on a dofferent host!
Me -haha you apparently don't know my history
Kohai - Maybe not, but that doesn't matter! You shoukd still listen to your community and quit being a tyrrant!
Me - i was being completely sarcastic
Kohai - then u misrepresented yourself by impersonating the owner—a violation of the tos
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:48:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:43:44 PM, askbob wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:20:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?:

Yeah, I suppose that is a problem. I haven't been interested in formal debate in months. I just accepted my first formal debate in nearly 6 months. During that time I think I've voted on maybe 3 debates.

I don't know how to raise interest, but I'll think more about it.

Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.

This is a great idea again OreEle. Maybe also give rewards for voting/incentives for giving the best critiques. I would rather juggle give that thousand dollars it was going to reward to debaters to people who provide the best critiques. Maybe have other members Give thumbs up and thumbs down to critiques and have a feature where you can sort the critiques by thumbs up and thumbs down.

I'm going to start a new thread for this.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 12:54:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 12:48:04 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:43:44 PM, askbob wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:34:48 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 1/22/2011 12:20:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
That then drives me to another issue, of which this may worsen. The amount of votes per debate can be frighteningly low. Some debates may only get a vote or two, some debates, none at all. What can we do to also encourage that voting participation doesn't die off while pushing for the higher quality of voting?:

Yeah, I suppose that is a problem. I haven't been interested in formal debate in months. I just accepted my first formal debate in nearly 6 months. During that time I think I've voted on maybe 3 debates.

I don't know how to raise interest, but I'll think more about it.

Maybe a vote counter for each person. Like the site keeps track of the number of posts you do, and the number of debates you do, maybe it can also keep tract of the number of debates you vote on, and seeing those numbers might spur people to take more action on doing that.

This is a great idea again OreEle. Maybe also give rewards for voting/incentives for giving the best critiques. I would rather juggle give that thousand dollars it was going to reward to debaters to people who provide the best critiques. Maybe have other members Give thumbs up and thumbs down to critiques and have a feature where you can sort the critiques by thumbs up and thumbs down.

I'm going to start a new thread for this.

http://www.debate.org...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:09:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
This thread is full of great ideas. I think a system needs to be implemented to encourage voting, and a mandatory RFD seems to be a good idea. There should also be a requirement to participate in a certain number of debates (perhaps 3 or 5) before you can vote.

Obviously there is a problem of how to go through all the RFD's, but I think that if a minimum number of reports/flags were necessary before review than the number would not be too significant, especially if the consequences were stepped up for new accounts.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 1:52:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 1:43:17 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
I've been messaging the admins about this sort of thing. I'll let you know what they say, and I trust that anyone doing anything similar will do the same.

Of course.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:01:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 1:57:49 PM, theLwerd wrote:
What would happen if people just typed "DSDJFSKDHFDJDSHFJDHFJDSHFS" in the RFD text spots?

Probably nothing. Maybe mods could delete their vote or suspend their account after multiple infractions or something. And, if you're a regular who does that, the community will probably sh*t on you.

Honestly, though, you have to admit that this is a good idea, the fact that it isn't perfect notwithstanding (since knocking idea for not being a total panacea is absurd).
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:05:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 1:57:49 PM, theLwerd wrote:
What would happen if people just typed "DSDJFSKDHFDJDSHFJDHFJDSHFS" in the RFD text spots?

Maybe you could "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" the RFDs based on the content and after a certain number of "thumbs down" has occurred, the moderators will review the RFD and decide what action to take. However, if you "thumbs down" a RFD because you disagree and not because the content is sketchy or crap, then you could be approached by the moderators instead. Just an idea.
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:08:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 1:57:49 PM, theLwerd wrote:
What would happen if people just typed "DSDJFSKDHFDJDSHFJDHFJDSHFS" in the RFD text spots?

It may get reported and the admin and mods would overview it and decide to remove it or not (in that case, probably remove it).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/22/2011 2:09:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 1/22/2011 2:05:28 PM, annhasle wrote:
At 1/22/2011 1:57:49 PM, theLwerd wrote:
What would happen if people just typed "DSDJFSKDHFDJDSHFJDHFJDSHFS" in the RFD text spots?

Maybe you could "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" the RFDs based on the content and after a certain number of "thumbs down" has occurred, the moderators will review the RFD and decide what action to take. However, if you "thumbs down" a RFD because you disagree and not because the content is sketchy or crap, then you could be approached by the moderators instead. Just an idea.

Or maybe X number of thumbs-downs removes the vote? It would have to be a pretty high number, though. Maybe like a number equal to one more than half the total number of votes for the debate. Given that this gets bad for debates with few votes, though, we could say: for every debate under X votes, Y thumbs-downs are required to remove a vote. For every debate at least X + 1 votes, Z thumbs-downs are required (where Z equals 1/2 X + 1).