The existing system has no integrity what-so-ever. Having participated in a few debates in no way qualifies a person to judge other debates. Not to mention you can open multiple accounts, troll a few debates and vote on your own debates after the new name has participated in enough debates. You need a system that breaks down a debator's record by subjects, then makes voting compulsory for subjects that they have demonstrated adeptness in.
I feel like the points system can be changed. With the current point system, having the better arguments, or essentially winning the debate, gets you the same amount of points as sources and conduct. While sources are important, I don't think you should get 2/3 of the amount of points for having good SOURCES to having the better debate. And I don't think conduct should be something that gets points; if your conduct is anything less than what is expected, DDO should check it out. Overall, i think sources and conduct don't deserve the same amount of points as winning the debate, and I think the voting system should be changed in that way.
Five of my past debates have gone completely voteless. I mean, I understand not everyone can answer each question. Some are too obscure, or troll debates, or too beyond some people. But a lot of my past debates have been great, simple debates that I've invested a lot of time in and I feel jipped when there's no response. I don't even care so much if I win or lose if that's really how people feel, but I do want some sort of feedback.
Only advocates change because they themselves have a sh*tty voting record..... The level of points you award for arguments, conduct, and sources are proportional, the points system itself is a good tool for measuring who won a debate, people are required to leave good rfd's explaining their vote or have it removed..... The voting system the way it is is perfectly fine.