posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 08:30 PM
Log-jams in Judging.....
We are always aware of debates that need judging. The problem is finding neutral judges that haven't already judged a dozen debates. It will take
Tis true, I went to the main debate forum page, and saw the debates that have been closed, and there are only 3 that are open. "Not judged yet", in
other words. The mods close a debate thread once there a ruling.
There's an issue I have with stating "neutral" judges. A judge is a judge. Sure, there's a bit of bias, but there's also a determinant factor
in the quality of the post. The judgments often exemplify that. The problem isn't really finding neutral judges, it's just in finding judges that
aren't being consistently being pestered to read debates.
I find my debate peers to be impartial, in theory. We have a mutual respect biased against the fact that one must win, and one must lose. It's a
fact of this forum. Someone will have a better argument, and will be proclaimed the winner. I lost, you lost, c'est la vie, the debates go on much
as water is shed off a ducks back. We don't much have issues with losing a debate. We read the judgments, and yes, we learn.
The log-jams in the judging should be resolved by the most active members. Tit for tat.
has a bunch of volunteers, which should be utilized sparingly, but the
dice should be rolled within our own table.
Yeah, I'm not the best at analogies, but you get the idea. There's say 6 solid members in this forum, and in a crunch, they should be able to
produce a judgment for the outstanding debates. Once we get the logs unjammed, we should have a flowing forum again. Either way, working together,
we can figure out a solution. I'm just presenting ideas.