CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:104
Arguments:44
Total Votes:132
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 CD TOWNHALL SPECIFICS (44)

Debate Creator

Bradf0rd(1428) pic



CD TOWNHALL SPECIFICS

Q4 TOWNHALL 2008
Add New Argument
4 points

I'd like to be able to see who voted for your arguments, and also possibly the ability to add a little comment with your vote (rather than having to actually form an argument) about why you chose to vote in that way.

For example:

1 down vote by: xaeon. He said "I thought your argument presented opinions as facts."

Side: transparent voting and vote comments
1 point

xaeon, if someone "thinks" you've presented an opinion and not a fact, why not have them prove that to YOU instead of the other way around before all of us go nuts just because someone thought something that may not be true. Let them do the work!

I for one don't really care about who voted FOR my argument...only against...lol!

Side: transparent voting and vote comments
4 points

The profile section of the site isn't utilised as well as it could be. Adding to the profile section to make the site slightly more "social network"-esque could be very useful.

Side: expanded profiles

LOL...I agree but I also think it needs to be fixed, I can't even get a photo of MYSELF up nor can I put up my My Space URL! Thanks for the reminder on the profile section, xaeon.

Side: expanded profiles
1 point

At first I didn't think much about this idea, but the difference in site experience would outweigh the work involved (imho), and it wouldn't detract from the actual debates... unless someone that would normally argue against you falls in eLove with you and takes your side with crappy arguments.

It could easily evolve to hold a greater utility as well.

First off, what do you think should change or be added?

Side: expanded profiles
3 points

I would like to see more being done with the automated emails. It would be easy to implement emails for, say, if someone replies to your argument, or one of your arguments are voted on. You could customise what emails you wish to be sent through your user area.

Side: emails
3 points

The points system, in my opinion, needs reworking. I think the following changes (even better if they could be applied retroactively) would be useful:

1. When you make an argument, it starts off with 0 points and doesn't automatically add to your score. This could stop argument spamming of arguments.

2. Would it not make more sense to implement a grading system for arguments, rather than a simple up or down. Possibly a five star system, allowing you to differentiate between the best arguments.

3. Debates can be voted on for how good the debate is. Possibly a five star system aswell? Then people could search not only on activity, but how highly rated a debate is.

4. Negative votes for your argument should negatively effect your score.

Side: redo points system
2 points

Hello again xaeon...

1. I believe just the opposite. I think one should get a point for creating and another for being the first to set the standard for the debate. That would be a +2 at the start.

2. I like your idea about the five star grading system but who would make the decision? Would we create a monster if we did that and possibly more arguments?

3. I think a starred rating system should be based on the level of activity of the debate. That would be a popularity vote rather than a good-bad vote. Again, who would best be able to judge a good or best argument?

4. Agreed, as long as we know why we're being down voted.

Side: redo points system
2 points

That is a good idea. All of it, I think. I mean, if needs some thought, but it could turn out to be a solution to this problem.

I think though that, for the arguments, a low star rating shouldn't count as much as a high star rating or grade. It shouldn't effect your overall score. When you get a five, it's a heavy agreement. When you get a one, though, it's a heavy disagreement. Now, where there is information at all, there has to be SOME sort of credible information, right? Usually, as I've come to notice a lot, when there is a heavy disagreement, it's not that the person's opinion is SO wrong...

Or, I guess what I mean is, if you're giving someone a 1 star, then that means you cannot find ANYTHING useful in the argument. Even in Joe's arguments, the ones that are maybe supposed to be funny, I know that I would at least give a 2 or leave it alone... not a one though... One stars are extremely biased... and I cannot find a way to explain it just yet, but maybe you understand what I'm getting at. A five star is just a "I completely agree" or "That's a damn good argument. Five stars should weigh more than one.

On the debate topics though, I sort of see this getting played the same way as the arguments are being played now. There are expectations that should be met when creating a debate. First of all, is it really a debate? Is it something that can be argued? Those sorts of things.

Maybe, the down votes in general shouldn't weigh as much as an up vote. Say, a down vote is worth, 1/5th of an up vote. That way it would take 10 down votes to drop someone 2 votes, as they are now. Will there be 10 trolls voting each of your arguments down once x400? lol, I doubt it. At that point it would become a completely different problem. Someone's who is intentionally trying to corrupt CreateDebate in general would be responsible for something like that, and it would be clearly identifiable by anyone who has the ability to look into the issue.

Side: redo points system
pvtNobody(642) Disputed
1 point

I have some criticism for your ideas. Point one, I'm OK with, I think that you technically start with zero, then you get +1 because the site assumes you would vote for yourself. But I'd be OK with starting at 0.

As for a grading system, I think that it'd be far too complicated and wouldn't really add much or alleviate the problem. Perhaps it's a result of being a computer engineer but I'm plenty fine with a binary system.

I do like the idea of ratings for debates though, I think that it would help differentiate between debates that have dissolved into meaningless prattle and actual debate.

I'm assuming that you mean that voting down affects the voter's score? Such a system would discourage down voting for sure, but it would also completely defeat down voting in general. I don't think that this would be a positive change.

Side: redo points system

I don't know if you would agree but I would like to see an "IGNORE" or "BLOCK" button installed. That way one doesn't have to put up with nasty notes from people for whatever reasons.

I would also seriously consider age categories so as not to exclude young people but to have them debate at their own level. By that I mean...you can have the brain of a rocket scientist but not understand how to conduct yourself with manners and all due respect as a human being with adults in a debate. Why not simply make one for teens that are let's say 13 - 16 or 14 - 17?

Side: Debates Especially for Teens
1 point

TOPICS PLEASE...

Post them under this "opinion" with tags.

Side: TOPICS
3 points

Either fix or do away with the points system for users. It seems like right now they reflect only who is most active on the site and not who is the better debaters.

Also the addition of a basic forum would save us from seeing non-debates like: http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ For_presidential_race_statistics_go_to_fivethirtyeight_com

thats all i can think of for now

Side: TOPICS
1 point

Hey, I resemble those remark!

Side: TOPICS
1 point

I agree with you about FORUMS. This would solve a lot of problems with CD, mainly the Non-Debates, and secondly it would help in situation like this, where we are all deciding something... Where will we post the results. What will be a topic and what will not be a topic in the Town hall? A forum would work great for this.

I do remember this coming up in the previous Town Hall debate and someone said that there is a lot involved in running a forum, and one of those things was getting an admin...

It would also be good to keep old debates somewhere, so perhaps along with forums there could be a sort of archive.

Side: CD Forum and Archives

The up vote and down vote parameters, specifically.

The language of debating. Particularly what does not belong in a good debate. Cursing someone out, calling them unsavory names, saying things that are prejudicial to an ethnic group or individual, making fun of someone's lack of education or exposure...things like that.

Should private messages/conversations be exposed to another's view and used as public fodder for the mill?

Are the additional topics that anyone would like to debate?

Side: TOPICS
kirstie1126(478) Disputed
3 points

I find this comment of yours interesting, Kuklapolitan, as you have called me hurtful names in debates and referred to my suggestion of making the Efficiency scores more important than the reward points as being similar to the Nazis!

So you have done the very things in debates that you are now asking others not to do...

But for the record, I agree with your above post, (I voted it up), that there is a certain etiquette to debating that should not involve name calling and stereotypes against each other. ;) And if that includes genders, races, religions, sexual prefferece, and political views, that should also include people's age!

Supporting Evidence: how can we make cd better? (www.createdebate.com)
Side: TOPICS
3 points

Sorry dude, I didn't read this before posting my topics.

Side: TOPICS
2 points

A meaning for the points. Prizes (not real ones of course) or something. At the moment it's all bragging rights, so maybe a "store" where you could "buy" stuff to put on your profile or something.

Side: TOPICS

Great idea pvt! We could also translate the various points into little ICONS such as:

A microphone for every 5 or 10 debates created.

An olive leaf headpiece for every 150 argument points.

A Silver Chalice for 500 reward points

A Gold Chalice for 1000 reward points

A Rolled & Ribboned DIPLOMA for anything above 85 Efficiency points

Stuff like that!

Side: TOPICS
2 points

Here's an odd idea that just popped into my head, parties. That is political parties. Rather than just having a group of allies and enemies a group of users could choose to form a party. What these would be used for I'm not sure, but I thought it'd be kind of cool. Just a random thought to through out into the fray.

Side: parties
Bradf0rd(1428) Disputed
3 points

Who knows, maybe this would be something they could apply to the political category, but realistically, it may cause more problems than it would make up for in it's interestingness(?).

I say this because you would have mob mentality to deal with, which isn't very reasonable. Republicans vs Democrats and all... I think it might just turn everything into a big bitch fight...

Just my opinion...

Side: parties
3 points

I think that's a really good idea. Would need some discussing to work out finer points, but I really like it. Infact, I made a debate a while ago about using the CreateDebate model for political policies. Heh.

Side: please no parties
1 point

Up/Down vote rules. Someone needs to decide on what their for exactly so we can do away with these whiny "debates" every time someone gets down voted.

Side: REGULATE THE VOTES
1 point

I agree. This always starts a flame war.

Side: REGULATE THE VOTES
1 point

SCHEDULE PLEASE...

Post your times under this "opinion" with tags.

Side: Time and Date

Scheduling for me is anytime but early mornings here on the East Coast in the USA. Anytime after the noon hour and all night long, if needs be. Any day of the week is fine as far as I am aware.

Side: Time and Date
1 point

Whenever is fine with me

Side: Time and Date
1 point

My weekends and Mondays are full. I'd like to see the town hall happen on a Tues or Weds evening, say 9pm Eastern/6pm Pacific. Date is negotiable.

Side: Time and Date
1 point

What about the day after Thxgiving, say 4pm Eastern, 1pm Pacific? Most Americans are just lounging about watching sports. Any idiot can type and read a town hall while watching football. And that time of day wouldn't be too early for those sleeping in nor too late for those in Europe. Of course, anyone in Japan is just SOL any way you go about it.

Side: Nov 28

10 PM Pacific Time. Does that work for everyone?

Side: Nov 28

That would be 7:00 PM in Connecticut...works for me!

Side: Nov 28
1 point

I know I'm probably not the most welcome to this debate, but I NEED to make a statement. I have and will not downvote someone because I don't 'like' them. I may be a little younger than some, and I have made some comments I regret. However, I want to fix this problem as much as all of you. For some reason everyone on here is thinking I am the main culprit. I am saying this is not true. I want you all to hear me loud and clear. Since KuKla has wrongfully accused me I have been downvoted nonstop. My efficency, not that I really care, has gone down from 85% to a cold 52%. Also, now people are coming to me accusing me of creating a second account. Also, not true. I want to enjoy the benefits of this site as much as the next person. I am not corrupt or as evil as I am made out to be. I wish all of this could simply be fixed.

Peace, Hope, and Love =]

-Heather

Side: A NEW VOICE
-1 points

I'm n0t certain h0w t0 fix this pr0blem but I'll make a suggesti0n. Recently permissi0n was given f0r a teacher t0 utilize CD f0r his students. That's great...BUT...we n0w have a situati0n in which s0me 0f these teens are wreaking hav0c with their arguments, nasty n0tes, perhaps s0me d0wn v0ting and then banding t0gether t0 defeat s0me0ne en masse. I certainly d0 n0t have a pr0blem with teens debating here...BUT...I d0 have a pr0blem with this type 0f s0ph0m0ric behavi0r. They're y0ung...I understand that...they cann0t p0ssibly have the kn0wledge t0 debate many issues pr0perly. This is a n0te Repubgal passed 0n t0 dc00l15: repubgal said: Hey, I saw you and kukoo are what I would consider rivals...In that case I'll add you as an ally! She's a 62yr old with an attitude and annoys me endlessly! So I guess I'll add you as an ally! Posted 22mins 9secs ago.

An0ther example in0lves dc00l wh0 never uttered a w0rd in the debate 0n imp0rtance 0f weap0ns. He left me a message telling me I am n0w his enemy: dcool15 said: yes i can tell you the last time i ate meat from an animal i shot and killed it was a lastnight i had venison and guns are a must they have done more good for us that you could ever

I truly believe CD sh0uld create a place where teens can debate each 0ther. Age gr0ups may be an answer but I'm n0t the site creat0r s0 I d0n't kn0w if that is s0mething y0u wish t0 d0. Perhaps y0u have a better answer?

Side: Teen 0nly r00ms

When I came in t0day my efficiency rating went fr0m 81 0r 82 d0wn t0 58!!!!!!! This c0mes fr0m the little minds 0f the teens! Retaliati0n is fun...is it n0t? N0 M0RE FR0M ME UNTIL Y0U C0RRECT THIS PR0BLEM AND MAKE THIS A VIABLE SITE T0 BE 0N!!!!

Side: GET THEM 0UT 0F HERE AND FIX THIS
4 points

I just had every single one of my 400+ arguments down voted, which caused my efficiency to go from over 80% to 60%. I spend time and effort making sure that my arguments are as sound as they can be, and to have my rating on this site dropped so easily is, quite honestly, making me just want to give up with this site.

Something needs to be done about it, otherwise I will hang up my debating cap. Hopefully the town hall meeting can remedy this.

Side: GET THEM 0UT 0F HERE AND FIX THIS
3 points

Yes, this is a serious issue, I can see it all over the place. Today, I mean, in the past... 3 hours I have seen 7 of my debates alone get ONLY down votes, and a lot of them. They aren't directed towards me because I don't usually argue in my own debates, but there are 16 down votes in my debates... all within the past three hours. From 9am to 12pm, there aren't usually people active. I mean, not that I can tell. It's not a really big up time, and yet I have 16 down votes from 7 of my debates.

Something's up here, someone (or some people) has/have taken advantage of the system (that isn't fully dependable in the first place) and this is what we get. People are deleting their accounts because the system is not stable... You can argue and argue and argue and... then get shut out even though your arguments may be accurate.

This is why we need visible voting. We can ban those who abuse the system, at least until something is worked out to where this cannot happen.

Kukla is usually outspoken, so here is your 1/100 people that will speak up when they are unhappy, I too am one of those people. That's 2/200 between us. Two hundred people, statistically speaking, will just leave CD, rather than speak out.

Something is wrong here, so this is something that we need to work on, and fast, please.

Side: GET THEM 0UT 0F HERE AND FIX THIS