The new Debate Forum - Calling all Fighters

Originally posted by seabag
Do any fighters out there agree there should be a 3rd judge to break a tie?

I would agree that this would be beneficial, though it depends on whether we're scoring points, and it's structured like hockey -- 2 points for a win, 1 for a tie and 0 for a loss. If that were the case, I'd be okay with ties.

The debate on "The United States is too reliant on technology" is completed. I would request a moderator acknowledge such and close the thread.

Reference: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by seabag

Do any fighters out there agree there should be a 3rd judge to break a tie?

Later, when the Forum gains a greater participation and we have more judges to choose from.

reply to post by seabag


I edited in the actual wordings of the judgments for you to read for yourself.

Socialism is good for America debate has begun......www.abovetopsecret.com...

ETA: I am dumb. I forgot to add my intro paragraph to this debate. That's why I wish we could save to our profile. I had it saved on another computer.

That's ok. I'll give my bow to ATS and Seabag in the final post.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Not a problem. Good luck for your debate.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by seabag

 

I edited in the actual wordings of the judgments for you to read for yourself.

Thanks, in fact, many thanks, Skyfloating. We needed the closure with an official ruling, and I'm good with the decision.

Kinda makes a point for every debate needing the judges "decision". The debaters like to read a ruling. It's how we tailor our debating skills, and how we get better in our forensic skills. Loosing or winning a debate isn't the issue, it's knowing how you did. Ties, like my opponent seabag has stated, is more an exercise in Political Correctness, (as seabag says, PC), than determining a winner.

I'm reluctant to address this issue, as I had a desire to participate in debates, and worked to get this forum running again. It's functional, not up to speed, but the mods are doing an excellent job to run things smoothly.

My reluctance stems from the fact that we really do need a third judge. All the debates could wind up as ties. As much as I hate to admit it, the tie between Hefficide and SonoftheSun needn't have been. The tie between seabag and myself needn't have been.

To be unfair to the Mods, the membership wants a decision, cut and dry, no ties. (Well, at least two members.)

A third deciding judge? I've been here since the re-invigoration, and I do support the inclusion of a third judge as a tiebreaker. Any debates that rule a tie should have a third judge to lay the decision plain.

As a participant in this forum, I humbly propose my position:

NO ties. Ever.

The third judge? That solution is open. I'm sure the staff will work out the details, knowing ties over and over are not conducive to the philosophy behind debate.

reply to post by Druid42


In sports or any other gaming for that matter, there are wins, losses and ties for a reason....or not?

Id like to create a thread "Fighter Rankings 2012/2013" and you guys could help me do it. Counting only debates from 2012 you could send me your point-count. They are:

Participating in a Debate: 1 point
Tie: 1 point
Win: 3 points

If you send me your point-count that will make it easier.

Win, lose or tie...

I've participated in 3 debates so far. One loss and 2 ties. If I was a professional boxer, I would seriously think on my next move...

The thing is, it doesn't bother me. That's just my opinion though. In our minds, when we enter a debate, we aim to win. Our egos enjoy that. We challenge ourselves, we try to use strategy to out balance our opponent, to lead him off track. We try to find the weakness, the soft spot; and we jab at it. We counter attack, we come out with new information about certain subjects, in order to make the debate interesting and innovative. We do aim to win.

Yet, we learn in the process. I know I do and I am sure that all debaters share this feeling. But isn't the fact of debating in the process itself? In challenging ourselves to give the readers the very best we can give them?

Win, lose or tie... should always be approached from a viewer's mode. THEY deserve to win, every single time.

Just my opinion.

I don't see ties as "trophies for all" - after all, the events were judged and a split decision was reached. If nothing else, then we should both field proud for ourselves for having held our own, and also gain respect for an opponent who stood toe to toe with us right up until the final bell sounded.

Some of the best friends I ever had were guys I met by getting into fights with and then, after awhile, realizing we were both about as tough - until one finally broke down and said "Hell with this, wanna get a beer?"

There's no shame in being equally matched at all.

~Heff

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Challenge Match: Seabag Vs. Sheepslayer247- Socialism is good for America

My first response has been POSTED.

reply to post by Hefficide

I don't see ties as "trophies for all" - after all, the events were judged and a split decision was reached. If nothing else, then we should both field proud for ourselves for having held our own, and also gain respect for an opponent who stood toe to toe with us right up until the final bell sounded.

In boxing there are 3 judges. A split decision is a 2 to 1 victory. The only way to get a tie is all 3 judges score it a tie (I’ve never seen that happen) or 1 judge votes one way, 1 judge votes the other way, and one judge votes tie (most common way). Having 3 judges reduces the possibility of a tie. Ties in boxing usually result in a rematch, too. Reason being - the fighters want to WIN, not tie.

Some of the best friends I ever had were guys I met by getting into fights with and then, after awhile, realizing we were both about as tough - until one finally broke down and said "Hell with this, wanna get a beer?"

There's no shame in being equally matched at all.

There really is no sense in debating when ties occur so often. Personally I’d like to WIN or LOSE before moving on. I got a tie in my first debate and I’m currently participating in my second. If my next debate is a tie it will be my last until the rules change. IMO it’s simply not worth the effort if nobody is going to win.

This is what I advocate - There should be 3 judges and no judge can declare a tie (they must pick one or the other). This way the winner either gets a unanimous decision (3 point victory) or split decision (2 point victory).

The loser gets a pat on the back....no points.

***Edit to Add***
I'm just throwing my suggestion out there. I enjoyed my debates thus far....I just feel a little empty about the result. I raised the question simply to see if others shared my desire for 3 judges. Apparently I'm not alone, though I'm certainly the most adamant.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by Druid42

 

In sports or any other gaming for that matter, there are wins, losses and ties for a reason....or not?

True. I've stated my opinion, and I'll let it rest at that. It's nice to know that the staff does take our opinions into consideration, but you, as the staff, are the ones running the show. I think it's important for everyone to acknowledge that. There's really no use in nit-picking details. Rules are rules, and for good reason.

I think Heff states it best by equating a "tie" to being "equally matched". Good enough for me.

Onward.....

We`ll give it some thought.

We`re currently struggling to find judges, not wanting to employ the same judges over and over. Thats the reason its two judges per debate.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Id like to create a thread "Fighter Rankings 2012/2013" and you guys could help me do it. Counting only debates from 2012 you could send me your point-count. They are:

Participating in a Debate: 1 point
Tie: 1 point
Win: 3 points

If you send me your point-count that will make it easier.

I lost track of how many debates I've been in, and due to that fact it would appear that I'd be listed high in the rankings. I haven't totaled my points yet, having errands to run, but will do a tally later.

Is this a precursor to an upcoming tournament?

Originally posted by Druid42


Is this a precursor to an upcoming tournament?

Not sure yet...

The Romney for Potus debate has concluded.

I'm now officially offering it up for judging.

Thanks to queenannie38 for the opportunity to debate a current event!

reply to post by seabag


I can relate emotionally. I've only had one debate ever and it ended in a tie. Remember, this forum is a work in progress. It will evolve as our numbers here grow and activity rises. Right now, to be honest, it can be a challenge to find just TWO folks willing to judge any debate. Often if asked, people will say "no" because they have a predisposition towards one side of an argument or another and feel they cannot be impartial.

This is a good thing.

As we grow, things will adapt and we'll get a working model that is efficient and as universal as it can be made to be. We've got several staffers here dedicated to making it so - and an ever growing number of members with just as much enthusiasm for it!

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


For what it's worth, I'm always willing to judge any debate (including those that I'm a participant of, lol.) A couple of those that I've judged, I've sided with someone that I totally disagree with, just because they made a better case, not that they convinced me that I was wrong, but that they made their point better.

That said, I do understand that it is difficult to find people to review a debate, and Lord knows you don't want me judging all of them.

What can we do to promote the forum and get more people involved? ATSLive would be one option that I'd encourage, if you guys have any pull there -- get it mentioned, talked up, whatever. I'd be willing to come on and promote the forum, and I'm sure that other fighters would be, as well.