The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! April Debate Tournament Ideas?in General

WilliamSchulz

Hey,

The March Tournament was very smooth and made improvements from the first tournament in Febuary. On that basis, are there any additional changes you would like to see?

One change that I might propose is keeping the tournament debates at the top of page one so that every viewer on the site can catch the debate process, which will increase viewers and voters for any given topic. 

agsr

 @WilliamSchulz, I agree with your suggestion to keep it on the top of the page, but probably only during the voting period?
I also suggest that more vetting should take place of users who sign up to ensure that they actually follow through and don’t forfeit debates.

it was a great tournament 

someone234

Ampersand banned from voting 

Pogue

Real justifications and analysis of the debate. I will not mention who, but a voter in the final round of the second tournament voted on who he agrees (in the explanation) with. No justification on why he voted that way. 

someone234

No ought to abolish debate topics. In the UN debate whitelfame would have lost if I hadn't voted for him as lower iq voters don't comprehend that the anti abolitionist redirects bop back on to the abitionisr by saying let's fix it, let's not abolish it. In the finals whiteflame took the other stance and won due to low iq voters other than With_all_humility.

Pogue

@someone234
Did you guys get to choose your stance? I know you got to choose the topic (I think) but did you get to choose the stance you got (For, Against)?

someone234

@Pogue yes and I did not make a mistake on my stance thank you very much.

Varrack

@WilliamSchulz I'd suggest extending the debate time and the voting period. Since half the debates were forfeited, it might be beneficial to make rounds 48 hours. Also, a forfeit should just extend to a round...I don't see why it has to entirely halt the debate.

Also, every debate should at least  have moderate voting. Casual voting does not ensure that onlookers even read it.

someone234

Varrack said:

@WilliamSchulz I'd suggest extending the debate time and the voting period. Since half the debates were forfeited, it might be beneficial to make rounds 48 hours. Also, a forfeit should just extend to a round...I don't see why it has to entirely halt the debate.

Also, every debate should at least  have moderate voting. Casual voting does not ensure that onlookers even read it.

You are a votebomber who gives three point leads for arguments and doesn't explain why you I've the other side zero.

someone234

someone234 said:

Ampersand banned from voting 

Varrack also until he fairly allocates points.

WilliamSchulz

Question for someone234, would you have contested similarly if the three points went to you, or by fair allocation, do you mean that you deserved a lead over whiteflame. Suck it up, you lost the debate, move on and revise your debating formula!

In response to Varrack, I do like the idea of 48 hours rounds, but I think that a forfeiture should end the debate, because if the debate is extended, the person might not respond for a week. It could be a matter of time constraint, but in that case, the person who fails to find time to respond should message aarong with such information so that the debate can be halted or a new opponent can be found. 

WilliamSchulz

Perhaps another suggestion is opening up the debate to 8 people, but in the event of a forfeiture, having a list of two people who are in line to debate should a forfeiture occur. In this way, the person who takes up the debate can continue the debate and keep the tournament moving.

Varrack

@WilliamSchulz I was thinking that only rounds could be forfeited. That way if someone misses their posting deadline, it'll be the next person's turn to post (they could either elaborate on what they've already said or crystallize) and then the person who forfeited will have another chance to post an argument in the next round, assuming that the forfeited round wasn't the last one. 

agsr

@WilliamSchulz, my concern of having a standin is that it may only work in round 1. I dont think it makes sense to have standins in semefinals

WilliamSchulz

Varrack said:

@WilliamSchulz I was thinking that only rounds could be forfeited. That way if someone misses their posting deadline, it'll be the next person's turn to post (they could either elaborate on what they've already said or crystallize) and then the person who forfeited will have another chance to post an argument in the next round, assuming that the forfeited round wasn't the last one. 

That is certainly an interesting idea, but what would there be left to respond to in later rounds if a rebuttal is left unrepresented from the opposing side. You are right, they can crystallize their debate, but if there was to be a forfeited round, there would need to be a point deduction of some sort as a penalty.

WilliamSchulz

agsr said:

@WilliamSchulz, my concern of having a standin is that it may only work in round 1. I dont think it makes sense to have standins in semefinals

I agree 100%, in the semifinals, the opponents should have a clear dedication to finishing the tournament, standins for Round 1's can advance to semifinals if they manage to pull off the debate. 

Varrack

@WilliamSchulz yeah, conduct would be deducted for forfeitures. I dontd think a 2 round debate would be impossible to work with though.

Pogue

Varrack said:

@WilliamSchulz I was thinking that only rounds could be forfeited. That way if someone misses their posting deadline, it'll be the next person's turn to post (they could either elaborate on what they've already said or crystallize) and then the person who forfeited will have another chance to post an argument in the next round, assuming that the forfeited round wasn't the last one. 

I think that the idea is good. However, the debaters typically put their argument in round 1(why it is good or bad etc) and then round 2 is the counter. How would it work then? 

Varrack

@Pogue if, say, Pro forfeits round 2, Con could respond to Pro's case and Pro would respond in the next round. Or Con could abstain from responding in the 2nd round and the third would be for rebuttals (to make the argued rounds even)

Yeah, a 2 round debate isn't much. But it's something, and it's better than a completely halted debate. Furthermore, I don't agree with 3 rounds being the max; I come from another debate site where 5 is, and that seems like a better system.

Essentially, if we:

- Extended the round posting period
- Increased the number of rounds 
- Made round forfeits not an end-all

That would solve the issue of a missed deadline completely ruining a debate. 

Fredsnephew

Let's have less of the low I.Q. jibes.

Results should be accepted with dignity and humility.

WilliamSchulz

Varrack said:

@Pogue if, say, Pro forfeits round 2, Con could respond to Pro's case and Pro would respond in the next round. Or Con could abstain from responding in the 2nd round and the third would be for rebuttals (to make the argued rounds even)

Yeah, a 2 round debate isn't much. But it's something, and it's better than a completely halted debate. Furthermore, I don't agree with 3 rounds being the max; I come from another debate site where 5 is, and that seems like a better system.

Essentially, if we:

- Extended the round posting period
- Increased the number of rounds 
- Made round forfeits not an end-all

That would solve the issue of a missed deadline completely ruining a debate. 

Another thing is that if we did these changes, which I agree with, perhaps the voting period can be extended to 32 hours instead of 24.