DebateArt should implement "secret topics"
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
secret topics: http://www.edeb8.com/motions.txt
"implement": The instigator should be given an option to instigate a debate with "Secret topic" along with a link to potential topics. The Debate will be called "Secret topic". When two people agree to it, then pro and con will have to argue a randomly decided debate from the list.
secret topics offer a fun and challenging unique spin on normal debates. These debate topics are very commonly used in formal debates, and forcing users to randomly pick a side gives them a unique difficulty to deal with, as they might be arguing against their true belief. By letting them research the opposite side, they can gain more information and actually be more prepared for the debate (since now they have a better idea what their opponent would do).
These topics are curated carefully by the creator of edb8, larztheloser, a decent debater in his own right. If we take a look at the debates going on right now on this website, it's clear that these debates are far lower quality than any formal debate. Who argues about "Is EricT A Sh*tbag?" or the absurd BLARGGH - Should this be allowed? ; Grumpy Cat vs Lil' Bub, etc. A lot of people don't know what to debate on, and even if they do, it's highly plausible they'll pick a side that they're biased towards and stick to it. I believe that "secret topics" will encourage people who don't know what to debate, to implement a more formal topic and entice your mind.
Debateart has plenty of room to let people thoroughly gain information on their topic. With potential of two weeks of debate time, this is much more plausible than, say, DDO's 3 day max period which is tricky and has people potentially giving up due to too less time. There is very little downside I see if you implement secret topics.
- DebateArt's debating time entirely allows for enough research and depth, even if the person doesn't know the topic at all
- Secret topics are balanced, and implementing them could lead to higher quality debates than trolling or talking about nonsense (or irrelevant topics)
- By giving you a side you may not agree with, you can have a greater scope of understanding of information
I await my opponent's argument.
Hi folks,I hate to bring this subject again... the more development we do for the website and the more mature it gets, the more expensive it becomes. All those icons and images cost money. Keeping database fast costs money. Providing a full text search costs money. Monitoring the server costs money. And the list goes on and on.... the truth is that it comes with a price, which in this case means reliance on the donations. And that's what this whole message is all about...So getting to the point, if you're having a good time on DART and would be willing to help us financially, please consider becoming our official Patreon -> https://www.patreon.com/DebateArt
This was announced to us all on June 3rd 2020. It's now June 21st 2020. Do you think we made enough money to not only cover the deficit that already was there but to fund a whole new feature and project?
it's not worth it.
edeb8 is a dead website and was the only debate website to invent this function. Users want to plan out their side and topic of a debate before they engage in it. I don't care if the topic is that someone is a sh*tbag or not, imagine if you had that topic randomly assigned to you and you had to be Pro? That's even worse.
The fact is that DART shouldn't waste resources on an endeavour invented by a defunct debate website that is itself proof of the wasteful nature of this endeavour.
I wanted to post all of this in Round 1 but I was very busy and apologise for the forfeit, I realise now that it was actually a concise case. Not much to it.
my opponent argues it will cost too much funds but his own example lists database, text search, monitoring, etc. But secret topics itself is merely a static list/webpage that you can easily pick one randomly (it would not expend that much money to write a little code to randomly choose a line and use that as the argument, hell, https://textmechanic.com/text-tools/randomization-tools/random-line-picker/ already does it). My opponent has also not proven that 2 weeks is not enough time to prepare for your argument. It's there only for the people who want the challenge and will accept it. Nobody's forcing you to take on 100 topics you potentially know nothing about. Finally Edb8 might be dead but I'm asserting that idea it had wasn't a bad one especially for this site to make. None of my points are refuted. Vote for pro.
I said that no one wants secret topics and that the only website to ever mechanise the usage of them is a dead/defunct one.
Pro agrees with me, calls it irrelevant and says that it's so little effort to put a line or 2 of code in and bam it's all done.
Do you know what the hardest part is (aside from having to completely recode the debate creation page and encode mechanisms of 'title inserted but not typed out by instigator' levels of code? It's finding what topics to use.
So far, no one on the entire website has suggested or implied a want for these 'secret topics'. Thus, not only is there 0 apparent demand (until this debate) but even Pro himself has never gone through the effort of just Random.Org-ing a set of resolutions (or using a trusted third party individual, like a mod, to do so) and then going 'plop' into the Title of a debate he's having. This is fascinating to me, since Pro is implying it's somehow 'so easy' to meet a demand that doesn't exist.
Why would you put effort in (even a little effort) when there is zero demand and the only competing website to do so is a dead/defunct one? You wouldn't, nay, you shouldn't. It's a waste of your time, effort and resources. It's that simple.
so that debaters did not know the topic until position was determined. You might have to argue against belief or on a topic about which you had zero information. Essentially, there was no guarantee that you had any advantage as you went in.
Off the top, that sounds idiotic. Were argument also pulled so others could not see the debate? So, what was the purpose of pulling titles?
There was a debate site called edeb8 that never had much CPU power behind it but had some innovative ideas, one of which was a "secret topic" which means that the topic was pulled from this list http://www.edeb8.com/motions.txt after debaters had accepted.
Part of the vagueness is the fact that I don't have a clue what this debate is about. If I knew what a secret topic debate is, I might have been able to offer a better vote, but I don't, so perhaps eliminating my vote was a better course.
You could pretty easily do some beta testing on such a system with a debate or two using random topics, and then try this debate again with evidence from that.
>Reported Vote: fauxlaw // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: 1:6; 1 point to Pro, and 6 points to Con.
>Reason for Decision: See Comments Tab.
>Reason for Mod Action:
In essence, this vote was just too vague... This can be avoided in future by just commenting on the core contention (and the main counterpoint or the lack thereof), listing a single source you found important (if voting sources), saying what conduct violation distracted you (if voting conduct)... You need not write a thesis but some minimal level of detail is required to verify knowledge of what you're grading.
The voter acted in such a way to suggest they did not give fair weighting to the debate content.
3 hours ago
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments ✗ ✗ ✔ 3 points
Better sources ✗ ✗ ✔ 2 points
Better spelling and grammar ✗ ✗ ✔ 1 point
Better conduct ✔ ✗ ✗ 1 point
Argument: Pro failed to overcome Con's argument of cost of mounting and maintenance of the proposal, as well as the fact that only one debate site enabled the proposal, and that site is done. Points to Con
Sourcing: Con offered the only sources.Pro's references to debates does not support the proposal. Points to Con
S&G: Pro failed to capitalized first word in R1. Point to Con
Conduct. Co forfeited R1. Point to Pro
I can't vote like how? What is reportable?
even if you vote for me, you can't vote like that I must report it sorry.
Yet you armed me with it instead.
I genuinely was going to bring that up against him in the final Round anyway, I intentionally didn't mention it in Round 1 as I knew it could help him.
Now that pro has posted their final round (I did not want to feed them evidence to support their case)...
Pretty easy to do here by asking for moderator assistance. We can modify titles and descriptions any time before voting ends.
This debate however seems to be on the idea of automating such a system for regular use.
edeb8.com is down, the site doesn't even exist.