I think Grammar and spelling in voting should be omitted

I mean, if it makes sense, it is still readable. If it doesn't, you can just take off points for arguments, for it is confusing. Either way, the human brain is hardwired to understand things even if there are errors. Grammar and spelling points are like picking holes on a bridge regardless of that both bridges can sustain 1,000 humans or an endless line of trucks.

I know you might be sleeping by the time I posted this, but any opinions on this? If you agree, change it. If you disagree, tell me why. I am an easygoing talker. I believe anything you said as long as there is evidence and as long as it is actually moral still.

It's a bit like saying 2+2=5 and expecting everyone to understand. 

Everyone understands what you mean when you say 2+2=5, I doubt many would agree with you though.

That isn't a grammar error that's simply making a false claim.

My point was.

2+2=5 might just be an erroneous tap of the keyboard.

So should it be left uncorrected?

Nobady said anything should go uncorrected. This thread is not about whether errors should be corrected.

Let's stay on topic. The topic of this thread is whether we ought to do away with the S&G point in debates.

OP thinks we should.

nah

My point was,

That this mistap would just go to an argument point loss instead of just its own. You should always proofread for the sake of arguments itself. I think S&G should be counted within arguments consider if his errors make no obstacle of understanding then what is the point of picking it anyway? If his errors are major enough to hinder understanding, then it is already a point off for arguments. We usually don't take off S&G points except if they just talk utter nonsense or they just forfeit.

I would suggest that a treatise should be presented properly, because poor grammar and spelling in this format is the equivalent to speaking incoherently in a traditional debate.

It's not that there are no tools or prompts available to help one avoid such errors. Factor in a bit of proof reading too and there is certainly no reason to present an abundance of spelling errors.

I would further suggest that syntax is obvious and therefore considered and judged anyway, irrespective of how a point's system is categorised. 

Therefore, I personally consider a spelling and grammar category to be well justified.

I would agree.

fi ya tulk lik fackn garbige n da dibet n es onredbl thaen da poyunt shud b awar-did

If the grammar and style takes away to the debate and because of it, the argument doesn't make any sense, then that's what the feature is for. If I ever judge a debate that's what I look for

I've long petitioned for it to be expanded to include formatting. And it's not something which is supposed to be used in most debates, basically just if people actively sabotage themselves.

As for the importance, I tend to cite an old debate of mine. There was an error which invalidated the intended debate, I pointed this out to the instigator, but they refused to correct it, so we had a debate focused on the Rap Music exception to abortion: https://www.debate.org/debates/should-abortion-be-illegal-in-The-United-States-of-America/1/

I see little importance to S&G as a voting point. I'd much rather see Ragnar's suggestion from somewhere - don't remember presently where it was, but I think it was in one of his voting explanations - a vote on "Kudos," that is, creative argument above and beyond expectation; evidence of true personal endeavor to excel by creativity that also adequately argues a point. And that is certainly worth more than one point.

Whoever reported my post where I purposely used awful spelling, then you just proved my point so you pretty much just destroyed User_2006 chances at winning this debate

The S and G point is meant to punish people who engage in word salad, that is typical of the schizophrenia patients that seem attracted to the site. So before awarding it, people should ask themselves am I being a bigot and making unfair demands on non native english speakers or am I correctly using this to punish word salad? 

Fine, go ban me. I am pretty sure you won't.

I won't ever ban you from this site, no Matter what you do

As much as this, what is wrong with the word salad? It tastes good and it is healthy. Could you tell me the reason? 

So, now you are anti-vegan? What? 

Spelling usually isnt a problem here. Most of the time its misunderstanding of words. Which is why more people are using dictionary or wikipedia or sources.

It is a sign of respect for the judges.  If you have to make the judges do extra work to find your arguments, that is pretty rude.

In a verbal debate, you have structure and presentation points.   You get docked if you mumble or are erratic. I see S&G as the same thing.