CreateDebate


Debate Info

65
61
Obviously Createdebate says NO!
Debate Score:126
Arguments:40
Total Votes:176
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Obviously (23)
 
 Createdebate says NO! (17)

Debate Creator

RevFred(349) pic



1 person should only be able to add 1 point to a debate.

Obviously

Side Score: 65
VS.

Createdebate says NO!

Side Score: 61
3 points

I think limiting the points one can add to a debate is a good idea. Actually, it'd be nice if the whole down/up voting system was removed (or at least, have the moderator choose whether to allow votes or not), then people can stop "voting" and actually present counter-arguments.

It reminds me of Youtube where your comment can be down-voted into nonexistence, not necessarily because the comment was offensive or pointless, but the majority of people who saw it didn't agree with your position, so they voted it down. Meanwhile, short, offensive, even ignorant comments are voted up because they voiced the most popular position.

Of course, removing the voting system would mean getting rid of the "efficiency" stat, which wouldn't be good, so I guess a limit would be a better improvement.

Side: Obviously
2 points

Hamandcheese and myself were able to get my Colbert vs O'reilly debate to 13 v 0 with just the 2 of us. This doesn't seem right....

Side: Obviously
3 points

I agree. I've actually bought up the point with CreateDebate. The system of being able to add points to a certain side of the argument by favouring or agreeing with other peoples' arguments seems silly.

Side: Obviously
8 points

Stay tuned, we have a scoring update coming soon to address exactly what you are talking about.

Side: Obviously
DebateMan(471) Disputed
1 point

I disagree. Each person should be able to vote for each argument once, not just once for each side of the debate. I think the main change I want is to see to be able to choose which side I am favoring, since oftentimes it chooses wrong based on the # of favor/oppose arguments before. But I should be able to vote for each argument I think is quality or crap.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
2 points

If the purpose of the debate point system is to express agreement with a side of the debate, then, obviously, a single point is all that is needed. That point should apply to the debate, not the participants.

If the purpose of the debate point system is to express agreement with individuals participating and not necessarily with the side being taken, then more than one point should be available and those points should apply to the participants but not have any effect upon the debate itself.

If a person wishes to sway the debate, then they should take a stance. That IS the purpose of this place, after all.

A debate should not be swayed by how many of the audience agree or disagree.

Take a note from the pages of any debate society's handbook... points are awarded to debaters for how well they debate, and points are awarded to a 'side' overall for how well they overcome the logic of their opposition.

Here, this would be the ability to vote:

1) How well I like the individual's use of logic and rhetoric.

2) How well I think the individual has made a valid point for their side of the debate.

3) Which side of the debate I support.

Each of these three should be tallied differently and of the individual votes, only the ones at #2 should have any impact on the debate itself, and even then, much more marginally than #3.

My suggestion would be to have an unidentified ratio of 'public support' apply if there is a wish to have public opinion of a person's thoughts be involved.

Side: Obviously
4 points

I agree. There's no reason by we couldn't have two separate systems in place: one for the overall democratic vote (one vote per member) and a separate system for rating individual arguments.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
Nikobelia(104) Disputed
-2 points
Cienna(50) Disputed
0 points

The purpose of the site is clearly to create debate (points to the name). Obviously if you permit people to vote for opinions alone, you're effectively cutting out the chances they will feel compelled to enter the debate themselves (hello, 2% rule, anyone? still valid).

You say you 'do not think that's true here', but you say it in relation to my comment that a debate's outcome should not be ruled by how much the audience agrees or disagrees.

Exactly what do you not think is true? That the audience does not currently weight the debate based purely on their agreement or disagreement? Perhaps you should reconsider, as the entire site is opinion driven at the moment, with most of the 'debates' dealing more with aesthetic and preference than evidence or supporting information.

In rebuttal to your statement that comparing this site to a debate society is 'invalid', I assert that, comparing this site to a debate society is entirely valid because it is not only named 'Create DEBATE', it is structured around the concept of DEBATE and as anyone with any degree of education on the matter knows, DEBATE is more than simply disagreement and opinion; it is the presentation of a logical argument for or against the matter under debate in which the very least requirement is some form of cohesive reasoning.

Obviously you have never actually BEEN in a debate society, else you would know that it can take many forms, of which ONE is a speech format.

Anytime you have the general public involved 'arguments aren't comparable'. That is why this site seems to be oriented toward offering contributor rankings. It is also why contributor rankings shouldn't weigh on the debate itself except when contributors are ranked highly enough on their skill to warrant it (hence the suggestion of threshold/ratio application).

Thank you for making the point for me.

As for 'judges', every reader/visitor to the site is a potential judge. The point underlying my agreement on this matter is simply that allowing visitors to weight the topic without presenting their own thoughts/logic/position is the antithesis of debate.

Thus the notion of clearly separating votes for contributor/debater skill FROM the stance on the matter under debate is critical to insuring an accurate representation of the difference between popularity and position.

Ultimately, this site has vast potential to be highly beneficial and much more than a social argument circle. If it is to get there (if that is, indeed, the vision for it), then segregating popularity and position soon and clearly is imperative.

Side: Obviously
2 points

As CreateDebate is currently organized, a person who is passionate about the topic may 'run up the score' for their side of the argument and 'run down' all opposing opinions. They don't even have to read others' opinions to do this.

If a person was limited to adding 1 point to a debate, they would tend to award their point to the best argument for their side. This would force people to be at least a little more thoughtful.

Side: Obviously
DebateMan(471) Disputed
3 points

The voting impacts both the relative position of the argument (with the highest rated arguments appearing at the top of the debate) as well as the side score. While you're correct in saying that you can run up one side by voting on each argument, you can't run down the other side as the Side Score only takes in to account the number of "up votes". Check out the FAQ for more info on debate scoring. Since this is a democratic site I think they should keep the scoring as is. It's pretty much the same way that Digg and Reddit work (especially for their comments).

Side: Createdebate says NO!

Just so a certain individual can't reply to his own comment twice (see link).

Of course you should still be able to rebut multiple arguments.

Supporting Evidence: e.g. the 'Are you buying Organic Food?' debate (www.createdebate.com)
Side: Obviously

Obviously..... not!

Side: Obviously
-5 points

I think there is a better, but much more complex way.

I think we should only be able to add 1 point to each argument made. So if I AA posts an argument in favor of a particular and BB agrees, he can give one point. Once someone gives a counterargument to said argument then AA can post a counter-counterargument and recieve another point. However 2 people who are just agreeing w/ each other should not have the luxury of so many points. (Not that it's a luxury, it's really just pointless..especially since the efficiency rating is a little misleading)

I also think that if someone wants to take away one point from an argument that must either add one point to a counterargument or create their own.

I think it's best to keep it simple. Otherwise it gets too complex and we'll probably have more new problems than solutions with each adjustment. However, with time I'm sure a complex, fair system could be implemented.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
6 points

What about having the moderator choose if users can only vote on one argument, or the number an arguments users can post?

Side: Createdebate says NO!

I like that idea. Also, if the cap was your ability to add say 5 points to a debate, than you could express your support in a degree of 1-5.

Side: Obviously
5 points

I think the issue runs deeper than someone being able to add 1 vote or multiple votes.

CD Team, please take Digg's comment system as a GREAT model for what to strive for. Some issues that I see with the basics of create debate are:

1. opposing or agreeing to an argument should not have any ambiguity to it at all. There have been many times where I agree with an argument that is on the opposing side, but if you don't look carefully and support that argument, you are actually supporting that entire side and not just the argument.

2. make voting up and down not anonymous. Again, similar to digg, you should display if any of your friends have voted up or down an argument. Right now, it's totally anonymous and doesn't present any consequences to the public about if you're "running up the score" as one debater mentioned in this debate.

3. Derecola asked for this, not sure if it's in the works, but please grey out or indicate which arguments I've already voted up or down. It's very annoying to not know what I've supported if I find out that there's debate activity on my debate.

4. put in a "sort by most popular" argument within a debate.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
1 point

Stay tuned for an upcoming overhaul of the voting & favor/oppose process. I think you'll be really pumped to see what we're rolling out.

Also, regarding your point 4, the "most popular" argument is automatically at the top of the debate as the default.

Side: Obviously
3 points

With the current system, I'd vote down people on my side of a debate if they said something inane or illogical, and if I could only vote once I wouldn't do that. Letting you vote for each argument encourages you not just to blindly take one side but to consider all the individual points raised, and I find that more rewarding than just coming down on one side or the other of an argument. It also means that the personal score thing counts for more.

I think a good way to score would be only letting you vote once for the side of a debate, but then also letting you vote arguments up or down and then maybe putting them in order based on the amounts of votes they have. That'd mean arguments that got approved of within the debate would be more prominent than others, which could be a good thing, and that the debate itself wouldn't affected by the fact someone who couldn't spell said something irrelevant that got voted down. It'd also get rid of the confusion with who's for and who's against.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
3 points

This is not a popularity contest. If a person has more than one point that he/ she shares, then te no of points should be given credence and points added accordingly.

Side: Createdebate says NO!

If we limit the number of points to a given debate you would not be able to refine your argument not would you be able to flip flop like a politician.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
3 points

It is critical to be able to acknowledge that someone you disagree with has a good point, or has made a well-structured argument.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
3 points

Forcing an individual to commit to a single point of view is like telling someone to use only one side of a magnet: Uninformed and pointless.

We can have different reasons for supporting both sides of an argument, or may feel that both sides are valid - or invalid. A system like CreateDebate allows a user to give a point towards a side, but forcing users to say one thing and then become spectators harms the debate as a whole. Allowing users to speak about both sides allows a fuller discussion of a point, and so CreateDebate's purpose of facilitating intelligent debates is furthered. Crippling any discussion for the purpose of "preventing uncertainty" is foolish. To be certain and informed, one must first become uncertain and informed, and being certain and informed is far preferable to being certain and uninformed.

Side: Createdebate says NO!

I like being able to vote on everyone's arguments, I don't like being limited to approving or disapproving of only one person's argument in a debate.

Perhaps points could be weighted a little differently, such as they do not directly translate into points for one particular side. (Example: 1 vote up for a particular person gives .3 points to their side).

Another thing, being able to vote on everyone's arguments once means that everyone can, so if someone is abusing the system it can easily be corrected by someone else.

Generally speaking, I don't see much abuse (that isn't automatically countered by the other side), save for the smaller debates.

The one thing I've noticed is that people will vote up the top argument, no matter how short or how insipid, and leave larger arguments un-critiqued. That's probably my biggest complaint.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
2 points

i th ink that only well thought out arguments deserve a point

Side: Createdebate says NO!
1 point

I do not think so. The reason being because, if this was the case, then HOW would you counter arguments? It just doesn't make any sense, if you could only make one point, then how could it be a debate?

By only being able to make one argument it will be more like an opinion poll rather than a debate.

However, it would be alright if for an argument, all their points were linked. That would be the logical conclusion. That way people wouldn't be able to get excessive points by spamming.

Side: Createdebate says NO!
1 point

I agree with CD 'cos its more like a real debate to be able to post in a good argument and have people up or down vote it.

Side: Createdebate says NO!