Proposal: Make “choose winner” the default voting system in debates

Author: Tejretics

Posts

Total: 31
Topic's author
#1
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
Currently, DART has two sets of criteria Instigators can choose among to have their debate judged by. One is the “choose winner” option, in which judges vote primarily based on which side had the more convincing arguments. The other is the “four-point system,” where judges weight arguments, sources, conduct, and grammar/spelling equally. Right now, the default option in debates is the four-point system, and an Instigator can change to the “choose winner” system if they want. My proposal is to make “choose winner” the default option and allow Instigators to change the criteria to the four-point system if they want.

My reasoning: New debaters on DART often don’t have information about what the competing systems are and are unaware of site norms. The “choose winner” option is fairer, other things equal, than the “four-point system.” Thett3 outlines the reasoning in his case here quite well (https://www.debate.org/debates/DDO-should-keep-a-voting-system-with-multiple-categories/1/), and Bluesteel does so here (https://www.debate.org/debates/DDO-should-only-have-a-more-convincing-arguments-point/1/). Hence, when a debater doesn’t have information, we should presume the fairer system, and allow them to change it if they want to. 
#2
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Tejretics
That your argument goes to a failed site's policies is telling. Ever wonder why DDO failed? You want to duplicate that failure? You want to dumb-down the current default of voters having to do some serious thinking? Thanks, but no thanks.
#3
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
why is everyone old coming back?
#4
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@Tejretics
I don't think many people would not know what "argument", "conduct", "S&G", and "sources" mean
#5
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Because we are all one big happy familyyyyyyy
#6
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@PressF4Respect
nice..
Topic's author
#7
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@fauxlaw
These weren't DDO's policies.
Topic's author
#8
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@PressF4Respect
When you instigate a debate, there's no place where those are mentioned.
#9
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@Tejretics
In order to vote, you have to have (in theory) read the CoC, where the categories for each are stated. In addition, debaters have to have at least 100 forum posts or completed two non-FF debates. This means the people voting aren't completely new to the site. Furthermore, the four voting criteria aren't that intuitively difficult to grasp. We all have at least somewhat of an understanding of what poor sources are, of what poor grammar is, and what poor conduct looks like.
#10
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@Tejretics
references to DDO policies in debates. Same difference: irrelevant to DART.
#11
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@fauxlaw
Same difference: irrelevant to DART.
Not really. DDO and DART have similar systems and policies.
#12
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PressF4Respect
Similar. Not identical. And since DDO is effectively dead [no longer supported], it is irrelevant.
#13
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@fauxlaw
Similar. Not identical
Exactly. There are things from there that also apply, which means that DDO isn't entirely irrelevant to DART.

And since DDO is effectively dead [no longer supported], it is irrelevant.
There are many elements of DART that were carried over from DDO. So in that sense, a part of DDO lives on in DART.

#14
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PressF4Respect
That would argue that traits from my mother and father live in me, but I would be hard pressed to admit, and you would be hard pressed to acknowledge that I could be confused for either of them.
#15
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@fauxlaw
That would argue that traits from my mother and father live in me, but I would be hard pressed to admit, and you would be hard pressed to acknowledge that I could be confused for either of them.
I never said that DDO and DART were identical, nor did I say that they could be confused for one another. I just said that there are similarities between both of them and thus DDO isn't irrelevant to DART.
#16
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@PressF4Respect
agree to disagree
#17
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@fauxlaw
agree to disagree
agreed
Topic's author
#18
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@PressF4Respect
In order to vote, you have to have (in theory) read the CoC, where the categories for each are stated. In addition, debaters have to have at least 100 forum posts or completed two non-FF debates. This means the people voting aren't completely new to the site. Furthermore, the four voting criteria aren't that intuitively difficult to grasp. We all have at least somewhat of an understanding of what poor sources are, of what poor grammar is, and what poor conduct looks like.
  1. I'm talking about debaters, not voters. Fair voting systems affect debaters a lot more than they do voters. So that's a strawman right there.
  2. You still haven't identified a single concrete harm of doing this.

#19
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@fauxlaw
That your argument goes to a failed site's policies is telling. Ever wonder why DDO failed? You want to duplicate that failure? You want to dumb-down the current default of voters having to do some serious thinking? Thanks, but no thanks.
Nobody has ever wondered why DDO failed because the answer is pretty obvious. (Hint: spam bots).

So even if DDO did have choose winner as its default option that isn't the reason it failed.

But DDO did not have choose winner as it's default option...

Your post is wrong on nearly every conceivable level. Literally the only thing you got right was that DDO failed (a non-sequitor).

Topic's author
#20
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@fauxlaw
That's a bad argument. It's also non-specific to the arguments Thett and Bluesteel made, none of which were specific/exclusive to DDO. 
#21
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,275
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@fauxlaw
What killed DDO in the end was not the debating system. It was the constant 503s and spambots, coupled with Juggle not caring.

#22
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
I personally prefer categorical voting, but also see the benefit of Winner Select. Especially for less serious debates.
#23
PressF4Respect
PressF4Respect's avatar
Debates: 10
Posts: 3,159
3
8
11
PressF4Respect's avatar
PressF4Respect
3
8
11
-->
@Tejretics
I'm talking about debaters, not voters. Fair voting systems affect debaters a lot more than they do voters. So that's a strawman right there.
Alright. In that case, this point:
Furthermore, the four voting criteria aren't that intuitively difficult to grasp. We all have at least somewhat of an understanding of what poor sources are, of what poor grammar is, and what poor conduct looks like.
would still apply. If you've ever had a conversation, you know what proper conduct is. If you've ever written stuff in the English language, then you know what S&G is referring to, and how to not get penalized by it. If you've ever done any research of any kind, then you know what to expect from the sources category. And if you aren't familiar with one or more of those concepts, then you will become familiar with them very quickly.

You still haven't identified a single concrete harm of doing this.
Fauxlaw did, albeit not in the best way. While it is true that he was wrong on the DDO part, his argument shouldn't be entirely discredited, as it does have some merit. The current 4-criteria voting system encourages people to go in-depth with the reasoning behind their voting decisions. On the other hand, a rudimentary "choose winner" metric would decrease the quality of the votes, as there would be no incentive to go beyond the bare minimum of the voting eligibility – a cursory analysis of the debate arguments, with the least amount of thought put into it. True, that system would increase voting, but it would also undoubtedly do a disservice to the debaters, as it is the feedback from the votes themselves that allow them to improve their craft.

#24
Jeff_Goldblum
Jeff_Goldblum's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 132
0
2
10
Jeff_Goldblum's avatar
Jeff_Goldblum
0
2
10
Would making Select Winner the default significantly change the proportion of debates that use Select Winner over the Four Point system?

Since the only effort needed to switch between one or the other is the click of a button, you'd think there wouldn't be much a change. Presumably, people's pre-existing preferences would be stronger than the 'cost' of taking a moment to click a button.
#25
Jeff_Goldblum
Jeff_Goldblum's avatar
Debates: 13
Posts: 132
0
2
10
Jeff_Goldblum's avatar
Jeff_Goldblum
0
2
10
-->
@Barney
I prefer categorical as well, because it reduces the arbitrariness of votes.
#26
User_2006
User_2006's avatar
Debates: 50
Posts: 510
3
3
11
User_2006's avatar
User_2006
3
3
11
I have a proposal that may or may not work. 

Who do you think had more convincing arguments? Pro Tie Con
Who do you think had better sources? Pro Tie Con
Who do you think had better spelling and grammar? Pro Tie Con
Who do you think had better conduct? Pro Tie Con

Based on this, who do you think had arguments of greater values, and should win?

None-bolded sentences judge no points.  Bolded sentences judge points. 

#27
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Tejretics
I will give you 3 reasons why you are incorrect.

  1. New debaters will improve less since the feedback on the debates and winrate they garner over time will not be as structured towards specific areas of improvement. Whether you admit it or not, there is actual forced difference in RFD depth based on it being Choose Winner vs 4-section system (wrongly called 4-point, it's actually 7-point). The 4-section system forces new debaters to improve more from the feedback as the voters themselves are psychologically pushed to structure their RFD better, separating the presentation of the debate away from the contents, yet giving feedback on both.
  2. Corrupt voting is less easy to police and has more net-impact given what others cannot vote on. The fact that it's all or nothing, means that even if one debater was weaker in the main arguments area (which is usually what the entire vote is based on in Choose Winner), they can't have a cushion of points via honest voting giving them that, against someone with a grudge or whatever having a very slanted but borderline acceptable RFD.
  3. It is never made clear (it can't be, it's not about what the Code of Conduct says) whether or not you are meant to base it entirely on arguments only or not. Think of a scenario where you have an unbelievable abusive, rude, lazy and/or whatever type of debater who made more logical arguments and rebuttals against one who put full effort in, even potentially sourcing better. Would you give the win to the other in Choose Winner, when the 4 points would supercede the 3 in the other form of debating or at least tie, if S&G is equal? S&G wouldn't necessarily be equal if this obnoxious debater presented it visually worse as we all know that S&G includes presentation, as was brought up in the recent/upcoming MEEP, by Ragnar.

Topic's author
#28
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
(1) and (3) are good points. I guess my only issue is that (a) equally weighting “spelling and grammar” and “sources” with “arguments” just seems bizarre to me and (b) the four criteria just seem like the wrong ones (clarity and structure, prioritization, weighing/impact analysis, picking the right issues, etc. seem immediately way more important than your “grammar” or whether you used a swear word once (which could cause the docking of conduct points)). Which is why I’ve never really understood this specific four-point system. 
#29
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Tejretics
whether you used a swear word once
I'd delete any vote awarding conduct for a single single swear word, unless it somehow overshadowed their argument (such as if instead of making a case they just say 'f__ you,' in which case they might as well have forfeited anyway).

The key thing on S&G and conduct, is the issues must be excessive.

Do you have any suggestions for how to make that more clear? Or any other refinements to the  descriptions?
Topic's author
#30
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@Barney
That was a bit of an exaggeration. But I've definitely seen voters dock conduct points, for instance, for repeatedly saying “bullshit.” And even if an RFD that said “multiple uses of swear words, e.g., [x]” would be deleted, a judge could easily dump three reasons why that constitutes poor conduct that are specific to the debate and not get their vote removed (i.e., it often, I would assume, is less about the violation the judge identifies and more about the reasoning the judge gives for treating a violation that way). Similarly, for grammar, a debater could repeatedly misspell a bunch of words and a judge could make a compelling argument that that “impaired readability” and accordingly dock grammar points. And that would be treated as equivalent to losing the debate on argumentation, in a system that weights them equally.