DA and the fundamental issue of a debate website.

Author: RationalMadman

Posts

Total: 117
Topic's author
#1
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Disclaimer: I intentionally made this about DA to have a true excuse to not put this in Personal where only like 2 people would read it. That's another issue with this website but not relevant to this particular thread.

This isn't a callout but it does address haters of mine etc.

I think I have begun to see things a lot clearer now (thanks to a 2 week break to give myself a rest and get on with some real-life things). A website for debating firstly has a major flaw; the owner needs to be a terrified coward. I want you to find me a single debate website, whether monetised or not, where you saw the head mod, admin or anyone who in anyway officially spearheaded the website that actively would engage in debates where they ever took a side that was anything but neutral. There is actually such a website, it's edeb8 and that website is the undisputed biggest failure, excluding Civid, of online debate websites thriving in the long-run.

The issue is something that runs much deeper than 'oh they have to be neutral to be popular and respected enough by the community to lead all kinds of debaters fairly'. See, this is the first issue with debate websites and the mentality they breed in you. You are actually not your opinion, that's something society as a whole gets wrong. You're not the opinions you hold, you're just an animal with a brain capable of processing verbalised concepts that aren't always pieced together soundly. The reason why the progressive outlook is objectively correct is that it's the only outlook where everyone in the society seeks to actually forgive and rehabilitate every other member of the society. You can indeed call it forceful and the right-wingers who say 'oh they are brainwashing us to be tamer and not be so nasty to each other' are actually correct. If you don't cultivate a society where the nasty are pressured into not being nasty, you always will get a society where the nasty bully everyone else who is weird in any shape or form into humiliation and silence. It could even work, theoretically, if you're that psychopathic to find a society nice where the weird and original thinkers cower in corners but the issue is they don't always do that; they get furious, bide their time and bam big bad things happen.

If you don't seek to tame everyone in a society in terms of their urge to hurt each other but then also want to tame their ability to freely express what they feel, then you don't yet understand progressivism (and indeed many 'progressives' by name don't). You can't just sit there saying 'hate speech' and going STFU to someone and expect them to feel loved by the society and partake in it but you also need to rehabilitate someone who is being abusive to others to not want to say those horrible things in the first place and that is what you can call 'brainwashing' but frankly there's no other way to make a society online or IRL work if you don't correctly handle toxic members.

Topic's author
#2
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11

This leads me onto my next point and this point is going to seem like me throwing a tantrum but please grasp that I am not here to scream about my suffering at all, I genuinely see how I am a villain in your eyes if you see me that way and I also understand how someone like oromagi both could love and hate me at times. See, to me this is very simple, do you value absolute fairness in a society? If yes, a great injustice happened recently to me that was deeper than bsh1 just removing debates after calling me paranoid for saying 'please don't do that.' On PM things happened and I got furious and whatever, I still feel I slammed home the case but honestly I was at a volcanic point and I am very happy I took this break. There was essentially an individual who I won't name, and this individual has from very early on to now (snowballing, more and more towards 'now') been on a voting-based, forum-based and now even moderation-action-influencing-based regime of making my life hell here. This individual seems superior to me in every element of the art of war until you begin to analyse the unique thing about the website and this is the crux of my post:

There is no other website than a debate website on the entire Internet that is competitive enough to have a leaderboard and such , where one individual with a grudge who doesn't at all compete in the game can entirely ruin one's time there even if one obeys all the rules or only semi-breaks them in the ways that others are legally getting away with. I have never seen in another website people say 'this person is so good at semi-breaking this rule, so now please immediately remove all the profit they would have got to the leaderboard but do not at all apologise for not doing it to the others who gained Rating by doing the exact same'.

Even after the rules changed to explicitly rule out what was only implicitly ruled out, these 3 debates exist:


both of which have a banned user as the opponent. do you know why no one is campaigning to have them taken down? Because they are not people that this individual has a grudge against.

Sure, they'll be taken down now that I mentioned them. What I am trying to say is that there is something so unique about debate websites because everything about the website becomes about toxicity. Either you're politely dancing around the rules to flame-war and anger your opponent on the forums and debate-comments or you're playing it really really dirty and doing just the same dancing with debate removal rules, voting removal or non-removal rules and application of those rules. The most unique thing is that without competing at all against the individual, you can climb the leaderboard over time by very careful, patient picking of fights that you have one or two allies back you up so the other can't vote back etc while the other was brave enough to debate many and you capitalise on the fact that the win condition of that person is you alone voting for them. This could be argued to be a low-population issue but rivalries form over time and this is what is so wrong about debate websites;

the most likely person to vote on a debate is someone who hates a debater debating in it. Prove me wrong, don't start denying this. Ignore FF debates, start looking at other ones. Now try to do the same thing for people who like a debater. Now do it for people who are neutral. The issue is that the voting is the entire win condition. It doesn't matter how well you debated or not unless the other was so utterly terrible in comparison. I even can lose a debate like this: https://www.debateart.com/debates/1051

I even can have someone deny me points if I have my opponent completely concede because apparently I posted too many points: 


If you can't work out the vote that is the one denying me points, well I'm not going to state it. This is not about an individual, this is about the fact that they can do what they are doing and that the entire attitude and structure of the website physically and socially revolves around disliking one another as a fuel and passion for the debating.

It's funny to some and 'cute' that the slogan of the website now is about proving someone on the Internet wrong but did you ever think about what debating always was supposed to be? Proving someone in the real world correct and worth caring about the opinion of.

This is just something I had to get out of my system. I am sad the website is what it is but I completely understand that this is not a DA issue, it's a debate website issue as a whole.

#3
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
Cliff notes version please
#4
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
-->
@Vader
RM is pissed off whenever someone even remotely opposes him and just went on an essay long tirade complaining about his haters/ people who troll him. 
#5
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Vader
Here are the highlights I could pull from it: 


1 - I have begun to see things a lot clearer now (thanks to a 2 week break to give myself a rest and get on with some real-life things).

2 -  If you don't cultivate a society where the nasty are pressured into not being nasty, you always will get a society where the nasty bully everyone else who is weird in any shape or form into humiliation and silence

3 - do you value absolute fairness in a society? If yes, a great injustice happened recently to me that was deeper than bsh1 just removing debates after calling me paranoid for saying 'please don't do that.'

4 - On PM things happened and I got furious and whatever.... (later on)...  There was essentially an individual who I won't name, and this individual has from very early on to now (snowballing, more and more towards 'now') been on a voting-based, forum-based and now even moderation-action-influencing-based regime of making my life hell here

5 - There is no other website than a debate website on the entire Internet that is competitive enough to have a leaderboard and such , where one individual with a grudge who doesn't at all compete in the game can entirely ruin one's time there

6 - Either you're politely dancing around the rules to flame-war and anger your opponent on the forums and debate-comments or you're playing it really really dirty and doing just the same dancing with debate removal rules, voting removal or non-removal rules and application of those rules

7 - the most likely person to vote on a debate is someone who hates a debater debating in it

8 - This is not about an individual, this is about the fact that they can do what they are doing and that the entire attitude and structure of the website physically and socially revolves around disliking one another as a fuel and passion for the debating.

9 - I am sad the website is what it is but I completely understand that this is not a DA issue, it's a debate website issue as a whole.

Basically he really doesn't like whatever updated rules were made regarding rankings on the site leaderboard since it negatively/primarily affected him, believes that a single individual is responsible for engineering this multi-pronged attack against him, but then does this 180 at the end where rather then call for an overhaul of moderation or the removal of someone from mod power, he instead blames all this on the inherent structure and design of debate websites as a whole. 
#6
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
the most likely person to vote on a debate is someone who hates a debater debating in it. Prove me wrong, don't start denying this.
Guess I don't hate anyone I think.

Guess Ramshutu bad and debate sites bad. 

The best thing to do is leave. Not worth being near what you consider bad. Eventually you will find something else and maybe it will be better. That is my advice. I should leave as well but well maybe. I just been doing really little so that a transition is easier to whatever it is I'll leave too. 
Topic's author
#7
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Leaving is an option and I've definitely left in terms of activity. Like, if the me today had used this site from the start I'd have achieved many less medals and been a more quality over quantity user in many respects.

I no longer will use this website as some kind of fun activity to spend all day on but if you mean 'leave it to somewhere better' the problem is that the entire Internet in any scenario where debating (or verbally fighting of any kind) is encouraged, is highly toxic and just like this website is in terms of the society that arises there.
#8
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
What I mean by leaving for something better is something that might or might not be a debate site. This can be gardening.

I personally think this site can never really be fun. If someone is having fun then they are not really using a debate site. When you argue with people it tends to get heated. That heat can turn into dislike and would reduce the level of enjoyment on the site.

Most conversation is a popularity contest. It doesn't matter if you were right. If people didn't perceive you to be right society will not have you as the winner. That is mainly the problem with any kind of conversation. You are doomed from the start given if you have no good way to appeal to the crowd or some standing that helps you win.

Doubt that would ever me mended the debate site part and the society part. 


Topic's author
#9
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Omar, you are one of the most actively toxic users here. I have seen you pick fights totally being the one who insults, provokes and every single toxic thing first. Don't play the victim here, you are very much the problem and not the solution.
#10
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@Imabench
Is it just me, or does this give the impression that he quit, went to a different debate site, they treated him exactly the same and/or he got banned?

Topic's author
#11
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I do not care what impression it left for you Ramshutu. You are completely incorrect on your analysis if you were curious.
#12
Imabench
Imabench's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 934
3
4
9
Imabench's avatar
Imabench
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
Nah its pretty regular for people to take extended breaks from debate sites after while and to also see how other debate sites do things. Im fairly certain that every major person on DDO had at least one other account on some other debate website for a time just out of morbid curiosity. I had one myself but dont even remember what website it was nor what my username was either. 
#13
Death23
Death23's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 618
3
4
7
Death23's avatar
Death23
3
4
7
If I don't like someone I won't vote on their debates if I think they won. I might vote on their debates if I hold a good faith belief that they lost. I will take extra steps to ensure that my RFDs will pass moderation. I might accept their debates because I would enjoy watching them lose. Being highly motivated to win, I will make better arguments. Anger can be useful for the creation of quality content, but it must be channeled productively to avoid the potential adverse impacts.
Topic's author
#14
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Death23
I share your attitude to dealing with enemies and actually I avoid my nemesis' debates in general because even if I think he lost I know the revenge votes will come hard and strong later. However, either by mental illness leading him to conclude that I genuinely lost debates that I so clearly won or intelligent well-veiled corrupt motive behind host RFDs, he will come and vote against me regardless so my only hope is to tame him over time and observing if he keeps at it just as much or not.
#15
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
Omar, you are one of the most actively toxic users here. I have seen you pick fights totally being the one who insults, provokes and every single toxic thing first. 
Who insults first then tell me how much I had to endure only to end up with a poor ending?
Don't play the victim here, you are very much the problem and not the solution.
Tell me which part of what I said laid it out I was the victim. I'll wait. 
Topic's author
#16
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
What I mean by leaving for something better is something that might or might not be a debate site. This can be gardening.

I personally think this site can never really be fun. If someone is having fun then they are not really using a debate site. When you argue with people it tends to get heated. That heat can turn into dislike and would reduce the level of enjoyment on the site.
The one who primarily ensures this in most interactions you have on this website is you so far.
#17
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
-->
@Ramshutu
lol probably 
#18
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
The one who primarily ensures this in most interactions you have on this website is you so far.
If you actually saw anything I was cordial until they can't answer simple questions or don't actually know when they are wrong. If you actually thought I started conflicts you would have proof of it but I don't. The person who can't answer simple questions or doesn't know when they are wrong starts it.

You fail to show me how I played the victim instead claim I am the one who starts the conflict. Guessing you are dropping that allegation. Next time try to support your arguments with evidence.

 If someone is having fun then they are not really using a debate site.
How am I wrong? Oh wait you don't say. I'll tell you how I am right so that you maybe understand how you are wrong.

Debate: a formal discussion on a particular matter in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward and which usually ends with a vote.

For someone to use a debate site to the full extent they would need to engage in a formal discussion with opposing arguments ending with a vote. 

Fun is a thing a person can attach to a use of an object. A screwdriver's most common use is to unscrew screws. If you find enjoyment in that, that is on you. It doesn't mean you are using the screwdriver to a more fuller extent. It just means while you are using the tool you are having fun. 
#19
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Death23
If I don't like someone I won't vote on their debates if I think they won. I might vote on their debates if I hold a good faith belief that they lost.
So if you dislike someone you limit yourself to casting a vote based on prejudgment? That is far too much bias for you to be voting on said debates. Just ignore them.
#20
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
I think there is a bit of confusion here.

Just having a user being banned for some reason does not warrant the debate being deleted. That was never, at all what any of the action was about at any point, so that misunderstanding needs to be corrected before we get close to starting.

Spam debates, started by the likes of Type1, and other perma-banned multi-accounts should be deleted - as these do not constitute any attempt to engage or debate - but are simply trying to spam the debate list and leaderboard. The reason this was necessary, is that one single user accepted 90-100 ELO points worth of debates in one day, knowing his opponent would be banned, and he would be guaranteed a win. 100 points is more points that 95% of Dart members ELO points over base. I’d be making the same case if any other member had accepted that many spam debates.

I’m not sure about which users are in those three debates, but there were a bunch of other debates deleted. I did not protest these debates as I had no idea whichuser this was, what the background was, and there were only three debates by different individuals - (and one started by a non banned user) so there hasn’t been the obtuse and obvious spamming, abused by one member to gain free points - so I wasn’t personally aware.

That being said; you seem to imply that this is about debates started by banned users. In actuality, it is about the multiple spam/troll debates started by banned user in a single day for the purposes of disrupting the site and which has the capability of massively undermining fair competition by letting one individual earn substantial number of points. Try not to make it about something it isn’t.











Topic's author
#21
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Let me help you guys understand what Ramshutu is saying.

RM is too good at that, he would gain so much elo. Therefore it's a bad rule grey area when he does it. Otherwise, I don't care really, I stay on top of the food chain y'know? Plus, RM stays down, that's always an added bonus.

Thank me later for this professional translation.

#22
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
Why does everything come back to the fucking food chain, this is a debate website
#23
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
I’m still waiting for you to explain why it’s s good thing for a single person to gain 100 ELO points with no effort on spam debates where the acceptor knows that the debates will get banned and will not have to make any effort.

You’d have shit yourself inside out had anyone else got in and accepted those debates before you.

#24
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
I’d rather him talk about food chain, than kink, sexual dominance, and how much of an alpha he is.
Topic's author
#25
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
It's either wrong for all or correct for all to play the game that way.

Actually I have intentionally let you and Orogami take Type1 debates in the past as they were so rude I thought that they'd get taken down and I simply was bitter but I let it happen again with Sparrow. :)

That is life, it is no problem for me. I will go bottom of this site's rating if I feel like it, I am here for the laughs and deep chats whether that's on a forum or in a debate competitively I don't care.
#26
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Ramshutu
That's true, but the food chain is between species, I thought he adored evolution
Topic's author
#27
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Food web is what evolution is based on, food chain is either social intra-species in general or in a very confined space between 3-4 species.
#28
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
Cretinous False dichotomy.

Its kinda acceptable to speed 10mph over the limit.   Going 100mph over the limit, and then opining that “what’s the problem? everyone speeds!” Would be a ridiculous argument - just as yours is here, for the same reason.

No one has abused things as much as you have; and the right response to trying to gain a ton of free points, and then being told no - aa it’s not fair in everyone else who earns the bulk of their points legitimately - is to shrug and understand why the decision was made.


It blows my mind that you are still butthurt and incredulous that you weren’t allowed to catapault to the top of debate rankings by exploiting spam debates, with zero effort.












#29
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
inter species between who, people groups, That's what Hitler's dream was based on
Topic's author
#30
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Many things blow the mind of a hypocritical bully, I wonder what doesn't blow the mind of such a simpleton, not that that's you of course. You're a genius and I'm a moron.