"Quality Debates"

In the Debates section, one of the relatively new features is the "Quality Debates" and "Hot Debates" sections on the sidebar. I don't know if that is one person's input, or a committee decision, but I've noted two issues that bear reflection by somebody. They are pertinent to me because both issues involved debates in which I was/am engaged. One: should a "quality debate" earn a place on the list if it is still an active debate? Two: a completed debate was included on the "quality debate" section even though it garnered no votes and therefore ended in a tie.

Is it prudent to enter a debate still in debate on such a list? And, is it prudent to enter a debate on that list in which no one, including whatever persons listed "quality debates" for which they, themselves, did not vote? It is frustrating to both debaters to put effort into a debate which no one appreciates sufficiently to bother to vote. I have personally begun voting on debates in which I have no interest whatsoever because I recognize that they are, at least, of interest to two debaters, and I should appreciate their time and effort. In some cases [very few] I have acknowledged I will not vote because of some deep-seeded resentment or utter dislike of a subject, and my vote would be excessively biased as a result. However, as a general rule, I have decided it is part of my responsibility as an active member  to participate in voting as much as possible.

If a debate ends in a tie in which voting has made it so, so be it. I am currently in the voting phase with Blamonkey which is in a dead heat with 5 votes. If that is how it ends, so be it, at least there were votes. But to end a debate in a tie in which no one votes, that is a shame.

So the idea is extremely simple.  Off the top of my head, the system simply finds all the debates where participants have a rating higher than 1520, where status is `finished` or 'voting' and no arguments have been forfeited and then just picks random 5 out of those. At least that's how I remember. My idea behind it was to expose debates of good quality because we have plenty of debates that would simply scare new people off since all the arguments are forfeited or anything like that. But I am up for adjusting the system and defining the "quality" in this case. 

thanks for the enlightenment. That explains why the list changes so frequently and why it does not distinguish a no vote condition. That, I would be happy to see changed re: policy, not necessarily the quality or hot list. I don't believe any debate should finish without at least one vote, even if voting period has expired.

Is there a way to get rid of the "battles" in the quality ratings?

Well, changing the logic that would prevent debates from finishing unless they have votes are rather big so it would need to be discussed with the community. But I can improve the quality debates algorithm and show only those that have at least one vote.

I am afraid not, at least not a reliable way