Forfeits make debate unmoderated or awards no points

Author: Melcharaz

Posts

Total: 21
Topic's author
#1
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Time, life and other things have caused victory and defeat for most people on here during debates. I ask that mods consider a rule to make forfeits to become unmoderated or not count unless agreed upon or mentioned in comments of debate. 

Who on here has seen moderated debates on tv, phones, computer or irl? How often do people get up and leave those debates? Hardly any.

The integrity of the debate is to explain a view and attempt to convience others of it in a formal setting and approach.

Since formality is automatically asserted in debates (unless violates rules, or said other wise) why would we accept someone "leaving" as a formal victory? 


de·bate
/dəˈbāt/
Learn to pronounce

noun
  1. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.
verb
  1. argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.
Is debateart more about earning points or about truely discussing a topic? 
Perhaps deleting all debates where people dont respond instead of awarding points will show who among us can maintain logic, facts and truth of our views while contested.

#2
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
When you say unmoderated do you mean that there should be no votes on debates which end in forfeit?
#3
blamonkey
blamonkey's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 532
3
5
8
blamonkey's avatar
blamonkey
3
5
8
-->
@Melcharaz
Debates where one side forfeits half of their rounds are considered full-forfeit debates. Insofar as someone doesn't vote for the side that forfeited, any vote suffices. Are you asking to lower the threshold to one forfeit? 
Topic's author
#4
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Unmoderated meaning points dont count, doesnt add to rating. 

No, im saying no one wins when otherside forfeits. Be it intentional or otherwise, unless agreed to forfeit is recorded in debate comments. 
If person(s) forfeit, either delete debate or make it where victory/defeat isnt given. 
#5
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Melcharaz
The time and effort one goes into [or should] to prepare arguments, rebuttals and defenses and citations of supporting sources does not deserve to have their efforts dashed only because another who has agreed to participation in the debate then forfeits that debate for whatever reason. The points, and the award of a victorious debate should belong to the one who expressed the better argument for the posit of the debate, regardless of the actions of the forfeiting opponent. Why penalize the winner for the actions of the opposition. What, the forfeiting side should have a feel-good participation trophy rather than award points and victory to the one who best demonstrated the willingness to debate in all rounds? Nonsense.
#6
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Melcharaz
I think the opposite should be true.  On the first forfeit, the debate should end with the non-forfeiter winning full points.   Whoever forfeits first usually loses the debate anyway, we just have to wait for week or months for the inevitable to resolve.

You used real world examples to say that real debaters seldom forfeit.  That's true because that would be a black mark on the defaulter but when it does happen in the real world is there really any question that the person left standing won the debate?

Such a rule would be ruthlessly exploited- any time your opponent makes a better argument than you the smart move will be forfeit the next round an nullify the debate.
Topic's author
#7
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Of course it would be exploited, but the leaving gives no gain or loss for anyone. Effort into making an arguement rewarded? Truth is its own reward, if you know your view is true, it wont matter what the other person does, unless they debate all the way and covience you of a better method or a different point of view.  And no, the person left standing at the debate table isnt the winner, only they are recognized for their endurance till the end. They win the integrity, not necessarily the better reasoning or proof of the debate. 

Most might say the point is not so much for the 2 people debating, but for the audience. This is a half truth. Conviencing the opponet is worth the effort as well. If people agree with the reasoning and/or the opponet as well, then there is no loser. We can all walk away winning, because a lie was disassembled, or the greater opinion prevailed. 

Points? Victory? Ratings?  Vanity.  Integrity? Truth? Worth fighting for and preserving.
#8
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
Unmoderated meaning points dont count, doesnt add to rating. 

The word you are looking for is 'unrated'.

So when my opponent realizes that my arguments are superior and their position is simply wrong they can just abruptly forfeit the debate in order to not lose rating? No thanks.
Topic's author
#9
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
I think rating should be done away with as well. If your opponet actually flees, then you won. Because they recognize your reasoning as better. But this is rare. Most of the time people forfeit cause of rl, or they dont want to engage in it. 
#10
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Melcharaz
1st comment
1st claim:
The integrity of the debate is to explain a view and attempt to convience others of it in a formal setting and approach.
2nd claim:
Since formality is automatically asserted in debates (unless violates rules, or said other wise) why would we accept someone "leaving" as a formal victory? 
Your 1st claim is debates are used to convince other people in a formal setting so basically a truism. Your 2nd claim is since both of them agree on being formal someone being informal, as in leaving the debate unfinished, the person who did win shouldn't win?


2nd comment
Claim:
No, im saying no one wins when otherside forfeits.
"When argument is not published by the deadline, the participant automatically forfeits the round and most likely will be punished by the voters."


3rd comment
Claim: 
And no, the person left standing at the debate table isnt the winner, only they are recognized for their endurance till the end. They win the integrity, not necessarily the better reasoning or proof of the debate. 
They are already voting for the integrity of the non-forfeiture as in ticking the conduct box. 


#11
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
2nd comment
Claim:

3rd comment
Claim: 

Read more carefully. These are not claims he is making. He is making suggestions for change. You're basically saying "that is not how it should be because that isn't how it is now", which is silly.
#12
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
I did have a response to post 9 but OP just blocked me for disagreeing with them so I will leave it at what I said in post 8.

Topic's author
#13
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Formal
done in accordance with rules of convention or etiquette; suitable for or constituting an official or important situation or occasion.

You are putting the cart before the horse with your reasoning. A thing becomes informal when it violates formality. When is it ever stated here that leaving a debate violates any rule or etiquette?

Also, i have no idea what reality you live in. When people vote forfeiture, they didnt vote on the debate, they voted on the person leaving the debate. They believe (erronously) that to vote on forfeiture is to give credance to the other persons arguments or persuasion.


Topic's author
#14
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Infact. Let me throw a semantic at ya.

A vote bomb is a vote cast without a sufficient argument, a vote cast without regard for the content of the debate, a vote which literally doesn't make sense (e.g. "it's contradictory"), or a vote cast based on a prejudgment of or prior opinion on the topic. Vote bombs that are reported will be removed.

Is a forfeiture in regard to the contents of the debate? Or in regards of the outcome of the debate.

Content
the things that are held or included in something.

I could say that every vote that is based on the outcome of the debate is a vote bomb. (Including forfeit votes) 

#15
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Melcharaz
No, im saying no one wins when otherside forfeits. 
He is literally clarifying his claim. I don't understand what you mean? What is it if isn't a claim?
And no, the person left standing at the debate table isnt the winner, only they are recognized for their endurance till the end. They win the integrity, not necessarily the better reasoning or proof of the debate. 
What is this more of a mess than a claim? I don't understand how winning integrity but still not having winning on the basis of reasoning isn't a claim.

Topic's author
#16
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
So you dont know what integrity is? All the more reason to award no points.
#17
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Melcharaz
So you dont know what integrity is? All the more reason to award no points.
Is this to me? Define integrity. 

Here is my idea of it:

Being honest.

It just so happens the conduct vote already has this in mind. Someone agrees to a debate then they don't complete it. The person who forfeited lied about being able to complete the debate so they lose the conduct vote. Someone agreeing to a debate is more than enough to imply they signed up for the entire debate since everything is clearly laid out so they can make an informed decision.  
#18
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
He is literally clarifying his claim. I don't understand what you mean? What is it if isn't a claim?
Is this to me? You tagged Mel.

I know he is wording his resolution very poorly, the misunderstanding really is not entirely your fault. It is only like 93% your fault at most. Just ask him the following question word-for-word if you want clarification (I cannot do so since he blocked me after post 8):

Which of the following statements would you agree with?

A. Forfeited debates currently are not voted on. That is the way it is.

B. Forfeited debates ought to be not voted on. That is the way it should be.

If you ask him that question word-for-word he will select B. I mean, well there are other possible responses too I guess... He might ignore you, block you, dodge the question, etc. but the point is he certainly won't select option A.
#19
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
It seems like he has completely lost his mind. Your questions won't really matter since I don't think he is going to respond nor say something that isn't wrong or cryptic. 

Topic's author
#20
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Actually i blocked ya wayyyy before post 8. Im not sure why you would suddenly decide why that post was where i blocked you.

Anyways. Yes. B. I believe in the reasoning in the debate as to deciding the debate. Not conduct or behavior of the debaters. But i do encourage people to not debate with people that irritate them. The reasonings you put forth shouldnt be used in defiance of their cursing or w/e. 



#21
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@TheRealNihilist
It seems like he has completely lost his mind.

Only in the metaphorical sense.

Anyway now that he has clarified his position in post 20 (again the misunderstanding was only 93% your fault, the remaining 7% being divided roughly equally between your elementary school reading teacher, your parents, and Mel's poor writing ability) what is your response to the proposition "forfeited debates should all result in ties"?

Assuming he doesn't block you for some random reason (apparently he blocked me a long time ago though I just recently noticed) you might be able to have a conversation with him on the topic now that you understand what he is actually saying rather than making some weird straw man of what he is saying.