A fallacy of “winning” a debate

Author: fauxlaw

Posts

Total: 7
Topic's author
#1
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,648
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
I have reviewed a number of “debates” in which the instigator issues a subject challenge, then proceeds with a fluff R1 that makes no effort to argue any point in support of, or against the Resolution, and then the opponent either forfeits the round, or makes an equally off-topic statement that neither argues for or against the Resolution. 
The debate proceeds through the argument rounds as in R1: nothing for or against the Resolution through the last round.
Voters are not given an option to offer a no-win vote; I.e., both opponents lose. As it is, because one or the other opponent is awarded even 1 point, that participant effectively wins the debate without actually offering a single argument for or against the Resolution. I believe this is a cheap win. I favor voters being given a no-win option to voting because this condition as described above ought to be classed a dual forfeit. Example: debate #5735.
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 388
Posts: 12,210
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@fauxlaw
You dont win a debate if voters vote for you, any more than popularity determines the truth. Voters dont determine truth, thus they are irrelevant to who wins a debate. I know that people here are stuck in the matrix where they think getting votes means winning a debate, which means their victory is conditioned by people's opinions and not by truth. The best thing to do is just to ignore voters and say whatever you want in a debate. You dont really want to try to win over voters by only saying things they agree with. It is much better to say what you really think. Besides, there are voting alliances on this site which go in a sense of "you vote for me in my debate, I vote for you in your debate". But I dont really see the point of bothering with such nonsense. I dont like total approval from others anyway. I find disapproval to be much better for gaining attention. Negative attention is superior for personal growth of knowledge, even if it harms mental health significantly.
Topic's author
#3
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,648
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Best.Korea
You ignore that voters are, typically, debaters, themselves, including mods, with as many versions of “the truth” as there are opinions in that regard. No, the object of debate is not to “say whatever you want,” but to argue with scholastic support (source references) for or against the resolution, true, or not. We cannot assume the resolution is true, but that is the instigator’s BoP, for or against. 
The winner of the debate is the participant who acquires the most points directly from voters; your peers on this site. You may personally disagree with voters’ determination of a win, or loss, and that can be appealed, but the mod[s] decision is final.
#4
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 388
Posts: 12,210
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@fauxlaw
You ignore that voters are, typically, debaters, themselves, including mods, with as many versions of “the truth” as there are opinions in that regard.
Thats irrelevant to truth and based on a false premise that if someone is debater or mod, that he tells the truth.

No, the object of debate is not to “say whatever you want,”
It is if you want it to be. Objectives are determined by mind.

but to argue with scholastic support (source references) for or against the resolution, true, or not.
That might be your goal, sure, but it is not really everyone's goal. Not everyone believes whatever sources tell him.

We cannot assume the resolution is true, but that is the instigator’s BoP, for or against. 
This is irrelevant to what I said. The voters still dont determine the truth. Being presented with "proof" is no guarantee of being able to judge that "proof".

The winner of the debate is the participant who acquires the most points directly from voters; your peers on this site.
I have no peers on this site.

You may personally disagree with voters’ determination of a win, or loss, and that can be appealed, but the mod[s] decision is final.
This is not a refutation to anything I said.
Topic's author
#5
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,648
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Thats irrelevant to truth and based on a false premise that if someone is debater or mod, that he tells the truth.
Why DebateArt.com?
Many websites exist for online disagreements. However, they are almost exclusively open forum based, without any method of quality control. They are often reduced to distorted echo chambers perfect for ideologues, and suboptimal for anyone hoping to learn or otherwise grow as a person.
DebateArt.com offers the unique value proposition of a safe environment for competitive one-vs-one text debates, wherein participants own up to the intellectual quality they are capable of presenting. The results of this are then judged by the community to determine a winner, using standards which mitigate partiality (see: Voting Policy). [Help Center/Debates/Wht DebatARt.com]

It is if you want it to be. Objectives are determined by mind.
See directly above.

 Not everyone believes whatever sources tell him.
Develop a debate strategy in support or opposing the Resolution and fond sources that support your strategy. This site has only partial entertain,ment value.

This is irrelevant to what I said.
Yes, it might be since what you said is irrelevant to the point of debate.

This is irrelevant to what I said.
Snob.

This is not a refutation to anything I said.
See directly above.
#6
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 388
Posts: 12,210
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Yes, it might be since what you said is irrelevant to the point of debate
Maybe you let others determine point of things for you, but I dont. This responds to everything you wrote. It was mentioned before, but you didnt refute it back then either, so really, I dont even need to put much effort here. And your claim that debating art voting policy makes sure voters tell the truth? So now voting policy determines the truth? Is that your position here?
#7
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,578
4
5
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
5
10
-->
@fauxlaw
Isn't the option to vote on a tie, good enough?
And the option for the debate instigator to choose if the type of vote system?

Though I 'do think the idea of, you both did terrible, and this should count as a loss in your statistics for both of you, to be funny.