Total Posts:43|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

DERP: Voting Moderation, Discussion

airmax1227
Posts: 13,728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 1:59:09 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Should Vote Moderation continue to be a default aspect of the site?

______

Before considering the above question, I'd like to introduce the DERP system, explain the above question, and offer some Pros and Cons to each position.

What is the DERP system?

DERP is the Debate.org Democratic Evaluation Resolution Process.

By using the DERP system, the Debate.org community can analyze, discuss, and resolve complicated issues in an organized and practical way. This allows us to come to a resolution that can facilitate a particular change properly. The DERP system is a two step process. First, we discuss the issue, then we vote on the issue.

The DERP system was recently used to discuss and resolve the issue of the Unofficial Tournament sign-up process.

The Discussion thread can be viewed here: https://www.debate.org...

The Voting thread can be viewed here: https://www.debate.org...

While this wasn't a particularly controversial topic, it served as a proper proof of concept for the DERP system, and I believe it accomplished that by showing that this system can be used properly.

_____

Today's DERP topic is VOTE MODERATION

At the very beginning of this thread the question was asked: Should Vote Moderation continue to be a default aspect of the site?

The way this topic is being presented is for a very specific reason, and the question above reflects that. We need to consider if the status quo of Vote Moderation should be maintained, or if Vote Moderation should become an opt-in only process.

So, to be clear, what we are discussing here, and will vote on following this discussion stage, is as follows:

YAY: The status quo of Vote Moderation should be maintained. Vote Moderation is a default function and should be applied to all votes on all debates (excluding those debates specified in existing vote moderation policies).

NAY: Vote Moderation should become an opt-in only enterprise. Debaters that want votes on their debates to be moderated according to Vote Moderation standards, must specify this preference in the opening round of the debate.

____________________

I believe that the status quo of vote moderation is a contentious and controversial issue, and to better facilitate discussion of this issue, I will now offer some Pros and Cons on the status quo. Keep in mind the following is not intended to be an all inclusive summary of the issue of Vote Moderation as the status quo, but a basic starting point to facilitate discussion.

Pro:

Vote Moderation, first and foremost, is designed to provide debaters with a method of recourse for bad votes on their debates. Whether or not we agree with the standards and the interpretation or implementation of them, the system most certainly does provide this, and it has been hugely successful as far as this intent is concerned.

Vote Moderation, by its very design, blunts the effects of the significantly flawed 7-point system. Debaters may choose this system unaware of its flaws, because it is the default, and vote moderation insists that votes within the 7-point system, do not unfairly award extra points for ideological or trivial reasons. This, by design, means that votes on the 7-point system are more fair, and more thoughtful.

As a continuation of the above, Vote Moderation protects new members from their lack of awareness of the realities of site voting. In other words, without vote moderation, new members would inevitably be vote bombed because of their lack of knowledge for how to properly set up their debate to optimize the types and fairness of votes they will receive.

Summary: Vote Moderation as a default option of the site provides members with a method of recourse for bad votes. Vote Moderation blunts the negative effects of the 7 point system, and protects new members from being Vote Bombed constantly due to their lack of awareness of voting conventions and options.

Con:

Regardless of where one stands on the need for Vote Moderation, there is no doubt that it decreases the number of votes, and discourages members from voting. Whether this is a reflection of Vote Moderation exclusively, or a shift due to site demographics, doesn't need to be established to accept the fact that any standards of voting, inevitably will decrease the quantity of votes, and the interest in voting.

Vote moderation standards rely on some degree to subjective evaluation, and furthermore can not account for every possible voting scenario. This means that vote moderation could have too much discretion in evaluation and removal and what could be argued to otherwise be a fair vote.

Vote moderation can not take into account a member who specifically chooses the 7-point system with the intent of having voters vote all 7 points. Site voting conventions evolved into discouraging the 7-point system being used to "juice" votes, but now with the up/down voting method, debate instigators have the option of using the 7-point system, to potentially actually encourage the placement of a 7 point vote, and view it as legitimate. Vote Moderation is not designed to consider that an instigator may want a 7-point vote placed, regardless of the quality of explanation for any of the supplemental points awarded (though it could be specified in the opening round, and VM would comply).

Summary: Vote Moderation decreases the number of votes and discourages members from voting. Any Vote Moderation standards that exists will always rely on some level of subjectivity and can never account for every possible voting scenario. Vote Moderation doesn't take into account the numerous options now in place to personalize voting, making vote moderation less necessary broadly.

------

I am not implying that the above is every argument in favor or against vote moderation, or even the best arguments. What is presented above is simply intended to provide some of the basic arguments, as a starting point for anyone who wants to take part in this discussion, but may not understand entirely what the two sides of the issue are. Furthermore, I want to impart on everyone that given the arguments above, this issue may ultimately come down to the perception one has of the degree to which measures should be taken to protect new members from bad voting. On the one hand, Vote Moderation protects these members from bad votes on their debates by insisting on good votes. On the other hand, new members will adjust their debate settings to better meet their preferences when they recognize the reality of voting conventions and habits. Consider keeping this in mind when you discuss this issue, and vote on it.

______________

To review previous vote moderation discussions, please refer to these threads:

Voting Discussion: Past, Present, and Future: https://www.debate.org...

Vote Moderation Policy Discussion: https://www.debate.org...

Vote Moderation Policies Discussion 2.0: https://www.debate.org...

Vote Moderation Discussion 3.0: https://www.debate.org...

Vote Moderation Options: https://www.debate.org...

The above threads cover every aspect of voting moderation, and members are strongly encouraged to read these threads.

______________

I believe the above presents the issue in its entirely, so this thread asks you the question:

Should Vote Moderation continue to be a default aspect of the site?

Should vote moderation not be used by default, it would remain as an opt-in option, requested by the instigator in the opening round of the debate.

______________

Thank you for partaking in the DERP process, I look forward to an interesting and productive discussion.
Debate.org Moderator
Wylted
Posts: 25,465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:06:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Since it is clear that vote moderation can not be done in a competent and flexible way, then we should eliminate it.

If the vote moderators can be flexible enough to abide by the spirit of the process, which is to get rid of only the very worst votes, only on debates where getting rid of the votes actually matter and not annoying people on debates where one side for example has a 100 point lead, and maybe only require as much effort on the voting as the debaters make on debating. If you have 2 retards debating and the votes are sub par, maybe have enough common sense to know that is just the type of vote they are going to attract and leave them alone.
Tree_of_Death
Posts: 1,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:32:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Vote: NAY

The current system discourages voting too much for normal users. There will still be quality votes--the creation of Rubles and the new Voting Group will ensure that--and ordinary members who would simply like to cast a vote but don't want to put in the time to comply with voting standards will vote more often. Our current situation is that almost all of the debates go unvoted, and those that don't will end with only one or two votes. This is unacceptable for a site that calls itself a debate platform--let's just get some actual votes on the debates. We can worry about quality later, and the implementation of a currency will greatly enhance this ability. I urge y'all to vote nay.
" I got thinkin' how we was holy when we was one thing, an' mankin' was holy when it was one thing. An' it on'y got unholy when one mis'able little fella got the bit in his teeth an' run off his own way, kickin' an' draggin' an' fightin'. Fella like that bust the holiness. But when they're all workin' together, not one fella for another fella, but one fella kind of harnessed to the whole shebang--that's right, that's holy."
--Rev. Casy, The Grapes of Wrath
airmax1227
Posts: 13,728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:37:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This is not a voting thread... this is a discussion thread... while I appreciate the discussion, the votes have no consequence here... The voting thread will be posted once the discussion has concluded.
Debate.org Moderator
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 6,576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:38:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Nay

I also move to have my vote reinstated in this debate
http://www.debate.org...
Stooge the Worst

#StandWithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16

"SeventhProfessor is actually a surprisingly good poster."
~Devilry

https://docs.google.com...
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 9,604
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:41:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Opt in is better. It keeps the moderation but also reduces a lot of the vote complaints.
"If anyone wants to engage in casual anti-Semitism, then whatever." ~Max

Vaarka swung his sword at the mod. However, since I am now incorporeal, he ends up accidentally striking the entire American landmass (It's a REALLY bastard sword), destroying both continents. Spiders are now at 50% of capacity."
SeventhProfessor
Posts: 6,576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:42:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD

IF YOU ARE A DUMBASS IN REGARDERY TO THIS THREAD (i.e. YYW, me), YOU MAY WISH TO VOTE IN THIS THREAD

DO NOT DO SO

THIS IS A DISCUSSION THREAD

THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD
Stooge the Worst

#StandWithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

"bossy r u like 85 years old and have lost ur mind"
~mysteriouscrystals

"I've honestly never seen seventh post anything that wasn't completely idiotic in a trying-to-be-funny way."
~F-16

"SeventhProfessor is actually a surprisingly good poster."
~Devilry

https://docs.google.com...
Shocky190
Posts: 259
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 2:50:47 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 2:42:15 AM, SeventhProfessor wrote:
THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD

IF YOU ARE A DUMBASS IN REGARDERY TO THIS THREAD (i.e. YYW, me), YOU MAY WISH TO VOTE IN THIS THREAD

DO NOT DO SO

THIS IS A DISCUSSION THREAD

THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD THIS IS NOT A VOTE THREAD

NAY

nac
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 10:56:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I would just like to point out, for lulz, that Danielle cheated her way to the top of the leaderboard, with the help of SaintNick and Vi_Veri, while Kleptin made it always voting 7 points to his opponents.

She would even cheat brian_eggleston: http://www.debate.org... (granted, he gave himself 3 points for arguments as the very first vote in this debate, but that's just him being hilarious even without an audience (at the time))
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 11:14:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Seriously, and I know I don't debate or hardly ever even read any debates, but I don't know why you bunch wouldn't have a look-see what the roubles thing does first. Votes, otherwise, are essentially random and not reflective of your debating skills at all. I mean, you at least want people to have actually read the debate before they vote.

The reason debates aren't getting as many votes anymore is because nobody gives a f*ck about debating any more. I just looked through some of Danielle's debates there, and their votes, and found so many users voting that were also prolific debaters at the time. There's like 5 of you these days.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 11:15:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
thett won that drug debate, also, btw., for further lulz.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 11:36:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You know what you guys should actually do is just scrap the leaderboard and go again. I know people put a bunch of work into their placings and all, but a big high wall of a leaderboard makes for a dead site.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Subutai
Posts: 4,315
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 3:45:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
While a good idea in theory, on this debate, with the people currently on it and the current long term vote drought on the vast majority of debates these days, having an opt-out vote moderation system does more harm than good.

For one thing, the vote moderation we've seen has, at times, been highly inconsistent and contentious. It has removed many good votes that were lacking in only one or two areas, but kept many bad votes that ticked all the boxes, but were actually vacuous in meaning. There have also been a number of highly contested votes (i.e. people disagreeing strongly as to whether a particular vote should be removed or not) in the years that vote moderation has been strong.

Plus, it's widely known that this site is facing a chronic lack of votes on debates. This is partially due to widespread apathy and a lack of an active voting block, but another significant factor has been the removal of hundreds of reasonable votes. A lot of those removals resulted in debates that never had a single vote left by the time the voting period concluded.

In a perfect world (or even a much more world than DDO currently lives in), vote moderation would be a wonderful idea. But, given the circumstances that we face, it's not really worth it.
We are not dead. We have never lived. - Varg Vikernes, "Det som en gang var"
Mikal
Posts: 11,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:19:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Objectively Nay

I think vote moderation is great and for the debates that require it and it's easy just to type *opt-in*. That get's rid of the need to moderate stupid debates that don't require moderating, and also allows noobs to vote on debates where no one cares if they vote stupidly. Like some people cannot reform their voting habits, and will vote with pure bias and some debaters don't care if people vote this way. I can't see a need to have moderation as non-opt-in other than potentially discouraging new users. But the risk is small and just making it known to them via stickies, or the new user's program, then people that are serious about debating can quickly learn to type *opt-in*. I also think this will bring back more votes. I'm sure lesser quality ones, but there will be a lot less debates going unvoted on.

TLDR

for the people who care about debates, they can opt in.
Mikal
Posts: 11,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:20:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 3:45:25 PM, Subutai wrote:
While a good idea in theory, on this debate, with the people currently on it and the current long term vote drought on the vast majority of debates these days, having an opt-out vote moderation system does more harm than good.

This sums up my view on it pretty well
Mikal
Posts: 11,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:21:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 11:36:37 AM, Devilry wrote:
You know what you guys should actually do is just scrap the leaderboard and go again. I know people put a bunch of work into their placings and all, but a big high wall of a leaderboard makes for a dead site.

I don't think you realize how easy it is to get into the leaderboard. It's not indicative of skill in anyway. I made a troll account and got to 5.1k in under 2 weeks and then deleted it, just to test that.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:37:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 4:21:47 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 4/9/2017 11:36:37 AM, Devilry wrote:
You know what you guys should actually do is just scrap the leaderboard and go again. I know people put a bunch of work into their placings and all, but a big high wall of a leaderboard makes for a dead site.

I don't think you realize how easy it is to get into the leaderboard. It's not indicative of skill in anyway. I made a troll account and got to 5.1k in under 2 weeks and then deleted it, just to test that.

No, I get that. But when you're seeing that people on the top of it have hundreds of debates, well, that's another thing - effort. I mean, I remember when there used be always someone cultivating some little win record - numerous someones. And since then it's been you, bsh1, and tej, in like 5 years. I think it's a full leaderboard and you bunch are just a little extraordinary.

I mean, doesn't it also just seem pretty obvious that activity would pick up if the current leaderboard was scrapped? I know there's a little something improper in it, but...
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:48:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
This site used get pretty wickedly competitive sometimes, and it was funny. I mean, obviously a little piece of the site dies once its leaderboard is filled up with effort.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
Devilry
Posts: 5,099
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/9/2017 4:50:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
For lulz again, Danielle had a good chuckle remembering the mongeese twins recently. I remember them making her cry at one stage lol.
: : : At 11/15/2016 6:22:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
: That's not racism. Thats economics.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 3:50:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Vote moderation shouldn't be eliminated, to the extent that if a debater wants vote moderation, they should at least get it.

Let's be clear: I'm not dealing with sh!t judges. And literally every person who will exploit a lack of vote moderation is an objectively trash judge, with a 0.00001% chance of them ever improving.

There are certain people who form the vast majority who should never vote on a debate. Ever. At least, not on my debates.

I don't care whether moderation is the "default" but it should exist at least so that I can have my debates vote moderated. Otherwise, I will literally never debate on this site to the extent that I always must fear insufficient votes from the overwhelming majority of incompetent but arrogant individuals.
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 3:52:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Also, to the extent that you can currently opt out of vote moderation, it makes no difference.

The only people who have their lives changed by this: those who don't bother to read the forum, which comes to them in the first ever PM they receive. To the extent that they don't bother to read something which they are told is essential, I don't care if they receive it because they implicitly consented to not receiving it.
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 4:01:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 2:32:43 AM, Tree_of_Death wrote:
Vote: NAY

The current system discourages voting too much for normal users.

If a normal user wants more voting, they can literally just say "vote moderation does not apply to this debate."

There will still be quality votes--the creation of Rubles and the new Voting Group will ensure that--and ordinary members who would simply like to cast a vote but don't want to put in the time to comply with voting standards will vote more often.

Voting is a service to the debaters. If a voter wants to vote but is too incompetent, they should not vote. This is not like voting in a poll or an election.

Our current situation is that almost all of the debates go unvoted, and those that don't will end with only one or two votes. This is unacceptable for a site that calls itself a debate platform--let's just get some actual votes on the debates. We can worry about quality later, and the implementation of a currency will greatly enhance this ability. I urge y'all to vote nay.

All of this can be solved with debaters saying "no moderation in this debate."
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 4:06:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
tl;dr

If there is a system where I do not get vote moderation, I might stop debating because that's the biggest difference between this site and Edeb8. Otherwise I can just spew rants elsewhere. I care about results.

I don't care how I get the moderation... opting in to moderation is fine. But I'm worried by that idea because it creates a community of sh!t voters who make barely sufficient votes, who then decide to vote on debates with voting moderation as well. So... I don't want voting on my debates to change. I always get votes -- it has been 2 years since a debate of mine has only received really horrible votes or has tied with zero votes -- so that's not a problem for me. Voting quality is a problem.

And more importantly... users who have their voting privileges removed should not be able to vote on debates with vote moderation, at the very least, even if their privileges are reinstated.
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 4:09:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What are the implications of creating the "nay" system on users who have their voting privileges removed?

Are there any users currently who have had their privileges removed?

How do I prevent them from voting on my debates?
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
tejretics
Posts: 6,869
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 4:15:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/9/2017 4:21:47 PM, Mikal wrote:
At 4/9/2017 11:36:37 AM, Devilry wrote:
You know what you guys should actually do is just scrap the leaderboard and go again. I know people put a bunch of work into their placings and all, but a big high wall of a leaderboard makes for a dead site.

I don't think you realize how easy it is to get into the leaderboard. It's not indicative of skill in anyway. I made a troll account and got to 5.1k in under 2 weeks and then deleted it, just to test that.

That's actually a problem the forfeit glitch helps solve.

It does two things. One, it prevents noob sniping. Two, it weeds out the debaters that do forfeit, so you know you can't trust them.
Just because you're magic doesn't mean you aren't real.
Mharman
Posts: 4,927
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 4:34:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I feel that we need it. Maybe a little less strict, so that it doesn't feel like an essay though. For example, you shouldn't have to recap the whole debate, which makes it feel like an essay. All we need to do is give one argument and rebuttal from each side, and explained who convinced us more, and why.
DebateArt.com is where all the users went.
whiteflame
Posts: 1,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/11/2017 10:52:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/11/2017 4:34:31 PM, Mharman wrote:
I feel that we need it. Maybe a little less strict, so that it doesn't feel like an essay though. For example, you shouldn't have to recap the whole debate, which makes it feel like an essay. All we need to do is give one argument and rebuttal from each side, and explained who convinced us more, and why.

I should be clear that that is all that's required of you right now. We don't expect you to recap the whole debate - assessment of a single argument from each side is sufficient, so long as it's clear how that assessment results in a decision.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.