Open call for ideas on future debates

reply to post by beezzer


Freakin' awesome beez!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by W3RLIED2

 

Our official debate banner

That is perfect! Looking forward to it!

ETA, i sent the official request over to the boss. Just awaiting the announcement, my firend!

For the record, i would have picked team Jake. Those vampires piss me off.

reply to post by W3RLIED2
Sounds great! I'll keep an eye out.

reply to post by antar
Thanks!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by W3RLIED2

 

Our official debate banner

You need more photon torpedoes in that picture, beezzer

reply to post by adjensen


Um, they were used up.

sniff sniff noone wants to debate me WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Sorry results were late. I'll set up the new debates that have been requested shortly.

We will not be having judged debates for a bit, just opening threads up for comment and allowing all fighters to give their opinions (which can now be done with the debates that have had winners announced as well). Input and ideas on if or how judging should be done in the future is welcome- I'm not entirely happy with the judging situation as it stands now.

reply to post by The Vagabond


If I may ask, what was the problem with the way debates were being judged? If it's something you'd rather not say I understand.

reply to post by The Vagabond


There's a lot of work to do, running the debate forum, and I'd like to propose a new judging method.

I'd really like to see the debating forum take off again. There are members out there who wish to debate, for nothing less than the mental exercise. With no time limits, there's no hurry to be overwhelmed by the necessity to reply to your opponent, so I suggest taking a lower key, but keep the debates going. Personally, I like the opportunity to think about my opponents reply, and I enjoy doing the research. My work schedule doesn't allow me 24/7 access to the net, but that doesn't prevent me from thinking about topics in the interim.

I propose a shift in the judging paradigm. Turn it over to a set of fighters who have the time to dedicate to reading the debates. Ask formally for volunteers. I would be one, maybe beezzer, but we need to see who would volunteer.

Then, make it a double tally. Each post in a debate gets stars, then the panel of three volunteer members make their comments, after the debate is over, and then the winners are decided by stars. Each set of three volunteers preside over an individual debate. The groups of member judges can vary from debate to debate, but the actual winner of the debate will solely be decided by the tally of stars in all the five posts in the thread, added to the star tally of the panel of judges that voted for them.

This is not a time intensive responsibility. As a volunteer judge, one of three residing over a single debate, and with no time limits, being a debate judge will be a casual experience. You will need to read the debate, and after it is over, post a comment as to why you picked your winner. You'll get stars for your vote, and they will be tallied up with the stars the opponents got throughout the entire debate.

All previous rules apply.

The debate thread will need to state the three member judges so they adhere to their responsibility, and in this thread, people can say (volunteer) that they would be a judge in the creation of a new debate thread.

That makes it a bit more complicated. Not only do you have to find a debate partner, you now have to find three judges.

But honestly, if two other members decide on a debate, I would post a reply "Judge one reporting in." All the member would then have to do is u2u The Vagabond with the premise, the debate partner, and the three members that would be doing the judging.

Thus said, I guess I should ask how many members would volunteer to judge? (I will.)

I will also ask for refinements to the procedure. Any thoughts?

reply to post by Druid42


Great idea, Druid. That's a very proactive approach and something I will stand behind you on completely.

I am glad to volunteer as a judge in any debate I am not participating in.

reply to post by enjoies05


It's not that there was a problem, it's a lack of volunteers to help. It was popular for a while, having competitions, but then the interest waned and the debates got stagnant. The Vagabond stepped up. We only had one debate until like June of this year, and now there have been five, and requests for many more. A new wave of people are interested.

With the new demand, others have to step up to keep it going. Will you volunteer to be a judge? The only requirement is that you look at both sides of the debate neutrally, and pick the winner from the best argument. That, and post a good reason why you think a particular member won.

It's a minimal time requirement. What say you?

reply to post by W3RLIED2


And, you have "fighter" status. You can't be a judge without that. Judging is not open to members, only fellow fighters. Peer review, aye?

Thanks for volunteering!

reply to post by vkey08


I'll debate you about anything. However, we are working out a few kinks.

Care to be a volunteer judge?

reply to post by Druid42


No worries, bud.

If members want to see better content and keep the ATS groups going strong I think it's up to us to get involved. Let's see how this plays out, dude.

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by vkey08

 

I'll debate you about anything. However, we are working out a few kinks.

Care to be a volunteer judge?

Sure when and where?

reply to post by Druid42


I would absolutely volunteer to help out. I've gotten much enjoyment out of the debate forum since I entered my first one a few years back. So it be nice to pay it back.

reply to post by Druid42
Anything I can do to help out.

I'd be honoured to give back a little.

Well, The Vagabond is in charge, so we'll have to wait to see what he has to say.

My primary concern is to keep the debates going on, and he asked for ideas. I've presented something feasible, and if there's enough interest, it may work out. At least on a trial basis. I'd say a month trial period would be sufficient to test it out.

After we work out parameters.

I'll quite happily put up my hand and time to judge. It gives us something new to read in the interim between our own debates, and let's face it, if you're like me since I joined the debate forum I have been reading everyone's debates with interest, so we're over half way there already.

Originally posted by Druid42

Then, make it a double tally. Each post in a debate gets stars, then the panel of three volunteer members make their comments, after the debate is over, and then the winners are decided by stars. Each set of three volunteers preside over an individual debate. The groups of member judges can vary from debate to debate, but the actual winner of the debate will solely be decided by the tally of stars in all the five posts in the thread, added to the star tally of the panel of judges that voted for them.

This is about the only thing I could be in disagreement with. The stars and flags system works somewhat, but just to clarify, you are proposing the winner is based on the sole number of stars they receive in a thread as the outright winner? It just seems to me the more popular posters would be receiving the lion's share of stars from their fellow peers, making it a bit lopsided for newer members to get a foothold. If however, the stars are based on the three judges decisions in each posting or rebuttal, and tallied at the end with judging points as has been in the other debates so far, then it seems a lot fairer. Maybe even judges adding a comment as to which post or rebuttal receives a point each round, and then tallied at the end. It makes judging seem more like judging points and not popularity.

In the meantime I'd like to see the next round of debates up and running soon. I'm keen to get another one going, just not 100% sure on a topic just yet. If anyone wants to get another ball rolling, hit me up

reply to post by Druid42


As you have already pointed out, judging the winner of any debate by stars is scewed because stars can be given for arguing in favor of someones already held beliefs or because of popularity, rather than only based on quality of debate.

I propose that stars have nothing to do with deciding a winner.

I like your idea of a panel of three judges per debate, actually it was something I was going to suggest anyway. What we need to do is look for the best debaters in the forum, and see if they wont judge debates. Debate is something that is an art unto itself, and those who know best the art should be the ones judging it.

We have wonderful debaters on the forums also who are not necessarily a part of the debate forum, one in particular who comes into mind here is Slayer69. He does know debate well, even if he can be mean (jk) We can consider expanding our horizons to look for judges outside the debate forum. Those people probably have less freindships with the debaters and are more likely to be completely neutral when judging. Not that I think any of us would be biased judges, but it is another possibility.

rather than putting all our eggs in one basket, we should have two or three panels of judges, so that one group of people is not taking all of their time in just judging the debates.

For now, my suggestion is that we all pitch in and either message Vagabond (or comment in the threads he opens) with our critisizims/kudos for the debates with our reasoning, and this would make it easier for Vagabond to decide a winner until we have some set judging panels. If that would be ok with him.

And of course, I am happy and willing to be a judge. I think all of us would be.