CreateDebate


Debate Info

13
29
Always Never
Debate Score:42
Arguments:16
Total Votes:54
Ended:09/06/08
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Always (5)
 
 Never (11)

Debate Creator

altarion(1955) pic



This debate has ended. You can no longer add arguments or vote in this debate.

Is there ever a final verdict on which side victors in CD debates?

Or are we all going to hell?

On any of CD's debates, has there ever been even one that says which side is the victor over the other? Not as far as my knowledge goes. Even if you put in a specific date for your debate topic to end, does it post a final verdict on which specific side's belief is right or wrong? Other than side-points there is really no final judge to say who is right and who is wrong. Or is there?

Always

Side Score: 13
VS.

Never

Side Score: 29
Winning Side!
5 points

Individually, the final verdict happens when the moderator bans you from a debate. :P

As a group, there is no real final verdict, although the number of up/down votes can provide a clue to where the final verdict lies.

Side: Always
0 points

Unless you look at it like "Whose Line Is It Anyway" and the points don't matter, the current or final score of a debate should be verdict enough.

Side: Points Matter
xaeon(1095) Disputed
3 points

The problem with that, in my opinion, is that you are counting the number of arguments per-side as the verdict. One side may have fewer arguments, but have the better arguments which would, if the voting is delayed until after a long enough period for debate is allowed, be the "winning" side. I hope I'm being clear with this idea?

At the moment, we're counting the wrong thing as victory. It's currently who initially argued a certain side, not who eventually came out with the strongest arguments overall.

Side: Never
0 points

I agree. I think that along with the side's score, there should also be an Efficiency score next to it for each side. Because, in my opinion, the side with the greater Efficiency Percent should be the victor.

Side: Efficiency Score Determines Victor
3 points

Right now, there is not. We've done a lot of brainstorming about this one but haven't yet reached a strong consensus. If you have ideas, we'd love to hear them. Posting them here is the best place.

Side: Share Your Ideas
3 points

Funny you should mention this, as this was one of the ideas that I contacted you about earlier to see where best to direct it.

Would it be a good idea to seperate the arguing and the scoring. For example, if you make an argument and you score one for either side, there was no debate involved. You didn't read the arguments and came to a consensus. You implicitly voted for a side before hearing people's views.

Would it, in that instance, make sense to seperate your overall vote (of which, you should get only one) and your arguments. You could also time delay this, so that you can not make your "actual" vote until after a certain period of time (thus, allowing people to make their arguments). This actually changes things from simply arguing your corner to actually debating and making an informed decision afterwards.

What do you think?

Side: Never
2 points

So you mean like a time delay between opening the debate's webpage and getting to vote for which side you think has the better arguments? That way the voter should use that time span in order to read over both side's arguments to make a better, more informed vote?

Side: Never

A 2-sided debate is like a rumble. There's a vertical line down the middle, people pick a side and every once in a while someone crosses the line to beat up someone on the other side or get beaten up. The scoring here should probably be the number of people on a given side and each person is counted only once. You can appear multiple times but you only get one vote. Crossing the line for a rumble doesn't count towards the side you crossed over to. If you cross the line because you've changed sides, your vote moves from one side to the other. At the end, the side with the most people supporting that side wins. The problem with this is that sheer numbers win, no debate needed.

Or we can add up the number of votes each sides get but each person still gets only one vote. The problem with this is that some people would only vote and not provide any input which is happening right now so....

Side: James P.Moran
xaeon(1095) Disputed
3 points

The problem with that system is that you're already casting your vote with your initial argument. If the site really wanted to encourage debate rather than entrenchment into your already existing views, the voting should be done after a long enough period for debate has been allowed. That way you can initially argue your side, but then vote for the other side if you feel that your opinion has been changed because of the debate.

Side: Never

Popularity contests are a little trickier.

This could be like a bunch of gangs battling it out. You can make it so that the tags delineates your gang. Again, you get only one vote. The gang with the most people wins. The problem with this is that the debate doesn't count, just sheer numbers.

Or, it can be judged like in boxing. Two people will start responding to each other and people vote for them. The one with the most votes wins.

Or combine the two. The tag with the most votes wins. The problem with this is that some people would only vote and not provide any input which is happening right now so....

Side: Popularity contests
3 points

I don't know if I've ever been in a debate (in person or on the internet) where there was ever a clear "victor" at the end. I think the spectacle that has become televised political debates between candidates and their coverage by the pundits affirms the fact that any conclusions to a debate are all contingent on the subjective standpoints of the participants.

While the voting feature of CreateDebate is an effective tool for the "popularity" contests, they hardly assist in the resolution of political or religious discussions. However, the good thing about this website is that it encourages and challenges thoughtful reflection on the issues in a forum that dampens the bitter hostilities that can spring up in face-to-face debates and cloud the judgment or ability to listen to counter arguments. I think that this "fair" exchange of ideas and arguments in the debate setting as it's formatted on this site is an effective tool for our generation to evaluate issues and their various positions in a manner that will hopefully motivate pragmatic action and (maybe) solutions.

Side: Never
1 point

No, but then again just because you have a different view doesn't mean that either side is "correct". I really dislike where people say something is wrong or right and then enforce opinion.

This is equivelent to a dictatorship and shows the traits of a dictator, a leader which has no control of the general "body".

I can appreciate others opinions, but it's great that some people (especially on this website) have to attack you rather than providing some solid evidence for their beliefs.

I think a "clickometer" would be great to have on all debates when this site becomes more popular, and no doubt it will.

It indicates peoples general opinion and not the effectiveness of arguements.

Side: Never
3 points

wow, i actually agree with you jesus.

Side: Never
altarion(1955) Disputed
2 points

The question wasn't "Is there ever a way to tell who is correct or not?" The question, if you read it correctly, is asking if there is ever a final verdict on which side has the better argument and wins the debate, not who is correct and who is incorrect. I will take this line from Lier Lier: "I don't have to be right to win a case, I just have to prove that the other side is wrong." You see?

Side: Share Your Ideas