Instigator
Mharman avatar
Points: 8

Users Should be Able to Delete Their votes as long the voting period has not expired

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 4 votes the winner is ...
RationalMadman
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Miscellaneous
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Characters per argument
30,000
Contender
RationalMadman avatar
Points: 26
Description
Round 1: opening arguments
Round 2: rebuttals
Round 3: rebuttals of your opponent’s rebuttals
Round 1
Forfeited
Published:
The Editing Kritik

The deletion is suboptimal and should be removed entirely from the website or at least be as temporary an option as it is. Why be able to bury evidence? Why not let the person have logged edits where mods can always see previous versions of the vote and such so that anything abusive remains subject to moderation and scrutiny quality-wise so as to help the user vote better either by advice, reward and/or punishment?

The Deletion-is-permanent Dilemma

Deletion is a problem. Deleting things on this website as it is and also as the word is supposed to mean, completely wipes it from the server. This is a moderation loophole where the solution that's easiest (the path of least resistance) is to not let people delete at all or at the very least keep it limited so people are held responsible when culpable for the abusive, neglectful or lazy Reasons For the Decision (RFD) that they post with their votes?


Round 2
Forfeited
Published:
I predicted and still predict a last-minute counter that 'but deleting should be available and instead altered so that Mods can see the previous version'.

Okay, this has 2 counter-angles:

Angle 1) The mods are self-professed laissez-faire meaning that they only tend to react to things if others than themselves report it, by removing it from view and not even marking that it's been edited, it will reduce the chance of people getting caught (so I am then altering my 'editing' to become that even normal users can see previous versions of what's edited, which truly holds the user to what they post no matter what they alter later on and increases likelihood of toxic or otherwise CoC violating posts to be dealt with).

Angle 2) The voter may not inherently be CoC-violating but instead be poor at voting. They may want or need encouragement and suggestions how to improve but be so insecure that they keep deleting the vote over and over out of lack of assurance. It's better to 'trap them' and then deal with their reasons for voting as are/were in a way that they explicitly will learn how to improve.
Round 3
Published:
I concede. I wish to debate this again in the future.
Published:
I refuse to lose, or to abuse the snooze-infested cruise-paced too late to the debate? Your shoes are not enough for mercy you must profusely bruise your depressed soul at my amusement, you're bruised and you're confused... For if I misuse my time in real life and make an excuse, do you think other users here would have honour or would the boos and the tomato-throwing cruel merciless groupies of you would say 'RM you gotta take your loss like a boss, that's what real men do' so tell me now, you think I truly owe a tie to you? I'm sorry but I'm the top of the food-chain in this cesspool.
Mharman avatar
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
Then how about we do this debate again some time.
Instigator
#9
RationalMadman avatar
Added:
--> @Mharman
That aside, tying against you (given our elo difference) will cost me (will reduce) and I also will gain less than I lost vs you in the electronic music battle.
I have lots to lose and lots to make up for here, I put effort in and even prepared for your return making your rebuttals for you and shutting them down. I earned this win and have zero motive to have mercy here and cost myself rating.
Contender
#8
Mharman avatar
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
First off, I had no idea who they were going to vote for once I tagged them. In fact, some of the people I tagged voted for you. I even specifically told them not to be biased. I don't see how that's dirty play.
Instigator
#7
RationalMadman avatar
Added:
You have lost, checkmate and there's no way to counterargue my flawless arguments.
You played dirty as fuck in the people you tagged during my beef and banning on the electronic music first debate. I am not gonna sit here and hand you a win after putting the effort of thinking through all arguements and counterarguments of this.
Contender
#6
Mharman avatar
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
You typed your arguments while I was stuck, unable to access the site.
Instigator
#5
RationalMadman avatar
Added:
--> @Mharman
No. I won it.
Contender
#4
Mharman avatar
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
Can we tie this?
My wifi was down for a few days.
Instigator
#3
Mharman avatar
Added:
--> @RationalMadman
tag
Instigator
#2
Mharman avatar
Added:
Fuuuuuuuudge.
Here's my argument: It would allow users to change their votes if they changed their minds about who won later.
Instigator
#1
Analgesic.Spectre avatar
#4
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Pro gracefully concedes, so arguments to Con. Con's conduct is the final round is abrasive, so conduct to Pro.
Alec avatar
#3
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Arguments for Pro's concession and forfeits.
Conduct for RM's insults in the final round.
Virtuoso avatar
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Forfeit and concession
Ramshutu avatar
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Full forfeit + concession