Hey, look Shila. Just because you aren't a bot doesn't mean you are free to make ad hominem attacks and expect people to take you seriously.
There's a saying made to counter statements like the one you just made: Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Essentially, even the least intelligent person should not be counted as automatically wrong because of their low intelligence. Even people of low intelligence may on occasion see something that much more intelligent people didn't.
That being said, elo ranking isn't a good measurement of intelligence. High intelligence doesn't always show itself though a user's debating skill. It isn't even perfect for measuring debating skills.
For example, the were times on DDO (and I think once on DART) when users were accused of being "noob snipers." The practice of "noob-sniping" happens when a debater trying to make their way up the leaderboard decides to challenge competition they know for certain are inferior to them (typically new users to the site), for the sole purpose of climbing the elo ladder. This works for noob snipers because it is less risky to take on multiple opponents who are inexperienced and are worth less points than to take on a single opponent who is more well-rounded and worth more points. While there are more points to lose in the event the noob defeats the noob-sniper, it's considered to be rare enough to make the trade-off worth it for a noob sniper.
Conversely, there are some users who may not be the horrible debaters they seem to be because they are constantly challenging more experienced debaters. While they're certainly more rare, they do exist. I know of a couple uses on this site who have low elo here, but used to have high elo on DDO. While it's possible they were noob snipers during their DDO days, it isn't likely. Most of the users I have in mind proved their skills on DDO, and only have low elo here because they challenged another user from the DDO days that was just as good.
Finally, there are some users that just don't put the effort or time into it. While it is true that low effort hinders the development of debating skills, it is also true that some users who aren't developing their skills have better skills than what they have showcased on the site. After all, DART isn't the only place people can debate. They are other debating sites, other social media platform, and there is also real-life debating, casual and structured alike.
To conclude, having a higher elo doesn't mean you are of higher intelligence, and it doesn't even mean you're a better debater. If you are #1 on the site, it simply means you're the best on the site out of those who put actual effort into it (assuming you aren't a complete noob sniper who can't beat better competition). You could be the best debater on the site period, and you could also be the most intelligent user, but that is not guaranteed.
