reply to post by The Vagabond
In the defense of "bringing back" fellow fighters as judges, I was not a member at the time, so I can only guess the way things went. What we have
NOW is a group of people who wish to volunteer to be judges. The posting limits keep it reasonable, and I believe the volunteers would dedicate time
to read and vote.
I am solely against having judge-free debates. As of the moment, I stand alone, and perhaps others will pipe in and give their opinion, but a debate
on a topic without a formal structure around it, and without a definitive winner, well, it's just another thread.
The debate threads REQUIRE a winner.
In that defense, you say you will create new threads for debate, but I would really, really, REALLY like to see the debate topics discussed in this
thread, and the members that volunteer to judge, and leave it up to membership to discuss in open (on this thread) about their debates, and have the
three members rule a decision. It does give an air of professionalism to it.....
Honestly, we all have fighter status. We CAN police ourselves. Trust us.
At least, give it a month trial period with the three member judge rule. It can't hurt, as this is a new generation of members. I formally submit
my request for a new debate to include:
1. Two members.
2. A topic.
3. The members deciding "pro" and "con".
4. Three volunteer judges with fighter status.
The U2U to The Vagabond includes all that info. It's only fair that way. I would respect the decisions of my peers, and voting would only occur
after the debate.
Would you approve that? Membership has no beefs with it, and we have volunteers. If it doesn't work with newer membership, lesson learned, but the
newer generations have good ideas. You have the experience of the old ways, but we have the desire to move forward. Please, consider, and give it a
That's all I ask.
Note: People watch this thread, and wait. It has no activity, because there is no activity here. Let's get the ball rolling again.