A note to all debaters and moderators.

Author: Vici

Posts

Total: 80
Topic's author
#61
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Barney
How do you feel about the votes which have been casted for you, in particular the ones which deducted a source point. Do you think you deserve a source point for linking voters to the site leaderboard and your profile? 
#62
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Vici
Since I did not link my profile, you should really take the time to read the debate sometime.

I won source points for an overwhelming amount of evidence in comparison to you. If in doubt, compare the analysis examples of me verses anyone on your list.
Topic's author
#63
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Barney
I won source points for an overwhelming amount of evidence in comparison to you. 
Things not to award sources for (barring for exceptional cases):

  • Common knowledge… E.g., that Wikipedia says JFK was the president of a country, which is unlikely to enhance any impacts (unless the other side is denying that).
Oops! Hey Barney, for most of us, the leaderboard the hall of fame are pretty common sense, though you yourself may struggle to understand. I could have easily linked every debater i mentioned, sourced a dictinoary for every word I typed and linked emotional data on childrens dying but I didn't. It really does look like you might win purely on luck - first from voters who are nutjobs and second from sources. But we all know who the big hitter voters are and they all have my back, so cry on



#64
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Vici
Name one example you cited of another debater being better at analysis than I? You even dropped that the best debaters directly emulate my style.
#65
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Barney
You can be a good coach and inspirer but a mediocre performer.

The coach of Roger Federer was not a god of Tennis etc.

So that argument was flawed no matter what, however I believe the biggest argument that won the debate for you in my eyes was when you pointed out that if Pro is saying some are good and others aren't, in comparison, Pro is starting to concede that there are good debaters here. That firstly destroys Pro's 'cheeky' contention and then brings into question how Pro determined that whiteflame and bones defeated good debaters while you didn't.

This means Pro never proved you weren't good and is having contradictions in 2 different ways.
Topic's author
#66
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Barney
Name one example you cited of another debater being better at analysis than I? You even dropped that the best debaters directly emulate my style.
I don't need to cite another debater to prove that you have mediocre analysis abilities. we start by assuming you are not good (chaos state) and then you provided four debates to prove you have good analysis and then I debunked them, hence putting you back into the starting point of not good. I don't need to cite people who have better analysis than you though I easily can (mr Chris, novice by a long shot, bones, whiteflames)

I dropped the fact that people emulated your style frankly because I ran out of words and there are far more important factors to address. And also, this argument is secondary, if I can prove directly that you lack the capacity for being a good debater, then I win, as I did. 
#67
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
We can assume he is 'good enough' too in chaos state, that's subjective.
Topic's author
#68
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
what evidence has he provided to be "good". The four debates he provided which I debunked?? The win streak which I charge as invalid? 
#69
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
what evidence did you provide he isn't?
Topic's author
#70
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
! That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I dont need to prove that he ISN"T something because the default is that he does not does have those properties. The starting point is that Barney is not good (lacking good) and if barney wants to be better than that then he has to prove it - I dont need to prove the default. 
#71
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
He and you both defaulted his rating being good as well as his winrate, he pointed out that you said whiteflame and bones are good for their rating and that their opponents are good for their rating (or that, implicitly, any other reason you called them good is baseless assertion that he can apply to himself too).
Topic's author
#72
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
I don't see what you dont understand - the default is that Barney's not good. do you think he provided enough proof to build upwards onto this?
#73
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
I think he used your own case against you in 2 different ways, meaning all he then needed was pointing out his winrate and rating.
#74
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
I have unblocked you.

Run the same or very similar case against me (with Barney as the subject at hand). Make the description have the DART rule still.

Make it 3-day deadline minimum please, I can't manage 2-day deadlines easily, it takes one rough/busy day and sleeping when I need to be awake for the debate, to ruin them for me.

Make it more characters this time, for us both to have more fighting room.
Topic's author
#75
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@RationalMadman
winrate and rating.
Refuted - I showed that my metric is stronger because it is harder to exploit. 

Also, I'm busy at the moment so I'll contact you when I can debate. 

#76
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
You actually had no metric at all, that was Barney's overall Kritik and I believe he successfully did it as I explained in my vote, he turned your own case against itself in 2 ways at once.
#77
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@Vici
I don't need to cite another debater to prove that you have mediocre analysis abilities. we start by assuming you are not good (chaos state) and then you provided four debates to prove you have good analysis and then I debunked them, hence putting you back into the starting point of not good. I don't need to cite people who have better analysis than you though I easily can (mr Chris, novice by a long shot, bones, whiteflames)
In the chaos state Chris, Novice, Bones, and Whiteflame, are all inferior at analysis to the debaters I defeated for having zero analysis ability shown.

At best your first standard shows that I am merely 3th place out of the 636, and to even then you chose to directly include cherry-picked data from DDO to make that conclusion.

Your second standard of good analysis abilities showed me to be the best on the site (within the evidence presented for consideration).

Your third standard of outside the site has me using debating to save dozens of lives. So anyone which agrees that the scope is beyond this site, would have to be anti-ethical to side with you.

And within your forth standard of never forfeits, I was proven to have zero forfeits; setting me above many of the debaters you listed along with the vast majority of the site (again, you insisted that forfeiting counts as debating, making people who full forfeit and never debate again part of the pool of comparison).


I dropped the fact that people emulated your style frankly because I ran out of words and there are far more important factors to address.
Dropping that my analysis is so good that the people you consider good are good for copying me... There's a host of ways you could have mitigated this, but you did not; leaving my stellar analysis abilities that you insist defines a good debater unchallenged.
Topic's author
#78
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@Barney
In the chaos state Chris, Novice, Bones, and Whiteflame, are all inferior at analysis to the debaters I defeated for having zero analysis ability shown.
Look I dont think you understand this bud. I dont NEED to show that Chris Novice or bones have better analysis. I only need to DECONSTRUCT your POSITIVE proof that you are good debate, for doing so will revert you back to the default. 

At best your first standard shows that I am merely 3th place out of the 636, and to even then you chose to directly include cherry-picked data from DDO to make that conclusion.
NOPE. First of all, even if you are third, that doesn't automatically mean you are a good debater because it could mean that no one on the site is good. REMEMBER, that definitions are universal (when I look for the definition "Debater" I get it out of a dictionary, and doing otherwise will be a stipulative fallacy) so you are still left with showing me that you are a good debater. 
Topic's author
#79
Vici
Vici's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 333
2
4
7
Vici's avatar
Vici
2
4
7
-->
@RationalMadman
You actually had no metric at all, that was Barney's overall Kritik and I believe he successfully did it as I explained in my vote, he turned your own case against itself in 2 ways at once.
so combined record isn't a metric? 


#80
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Vici
Challenge me to a debate, use the same arguments, I will show you the flaws.