Allowing no-vote debates to clock-out is what comes out of back-end of bull.

To all Mods, in particular, but I invite any relevant commentary:

I am currently voting on a debate, on this very subject of debate veting, but am interrupting the process to make a comment now, which I have suggested to Mods before with no effect, to date, that voting, being a privilege, because there is restriction on members who can vote, and I agree it should have restriction, but a problem exists that too many debates are fully and honestly debating on good subjects, without forfeiture of a single round, and yet manage to clock-out without a single vote, while, at the same time, votes are granted to debaters who offer poor arguments, or next to nine, amid still have a win, often with con tribution by Mods, simply because the opponent forfeited. That’s ~@$#@#!
I am personally affected by this outcome, and have complained about it before, with Mod response like "we need to look into that," but without resolution. Voting is a metric counted on the Debate Leaderboard, but I have my doubts that it moves the needle in rating, because I personally rank 7th among almost 1,300 active debating members after active membership of only 2.5 years [I joined in Mar. 2020, achieved about 10th ranked when I left voluntarily in 2022] and, as an experiment, have increased my volume of voting, but my rating has not moved a bit. Voting simply does not carry the weight that it should be encouraged to have, and thus these personal results:

https://www.debateart.com/debates/3183-a-stopped-clock-would-still-be-considered-right-two-times-a-day
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3132-resolution-there-is-no-end-to-the-body-of-knowledge
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2698-in-the-scriptures-jesus-christ-did-not-die-for-everyone
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2566-resolved-two-separate-species-of-relatively-equal-intelligence-one-humanoid-and-one-not-can-cohabit-a-planet-maintaining-peaceful-non-threatening-cohabitation
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2244-resolved-methane-silence-the-rice-and-save-the-planet
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2130-money-can-bring-happiness
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2042-i-can-t-isn-t-necessarily-a-defeatist-attitude
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2021-there-should-be-a-limit-to-the-number-of-debates-a-person-can-be-engaged-in-at-a-time
https://www.debateart.com/debates/1990-resolved-the-house-should-vacate-its-impeachment-of-president-trump


These are nine debates I participated in with various opponents over a period of about 6 months in 2020 which were all multi-round, full debate participation in all rounds which clocked out as no votes. 9 of 80 debates. I initiated most, but not all of them. 
My current win percentage is 69.4% of total debates, meaning, on average, I should have 6 more debate wins, but I don't. I may have lost all of them, and that's fine. Of course I debate with the goal to win, and I accept defeat, when honestly defeated, but I do not accept more than 11% of my effort, and my varied opponents, to prepare debate rounds just to have a no-vote result. 
Mods. please give more credentialed weight to the privilege of voting, or leave no-vote results by clock-out on the clock until at least one vote is registered. I suggest that a debate in danger of clock-out without a vote have an auto-message  sent to all mods and even maybe the top 10-20 ranked voters on the leaderboard who have demonstrated willingness to vote before the clock-out, or else code it to remain open a period of time longer to allow a vote. I think most debaters who have tried to use all rounds to argue/rebut, etc, deserve to earn a vote for their effort. Otherwise, what's the point of debating in the first place, or using voting as a metric in the Leaderboard? 

I have 100% win rate.

In about 53 minutes, I will have 66% win rate tho.

Tbh a lot people don’t even go to the debate part of the site. Whenever someone DMs me directly to vote on their debate, I usually do it though 

The mods enforce rules to suit users posting depraved things in the forums while dissuading serious sophisticated 1v1ers from ever sticking around a place that allows n words and other vile content.

Thanks for reading. Use your brains and protest the moderation.

Or... You know, worry more about sone trolls than userbase retention.

If you or anyone else has a problem, you can leave

Yes, they already do that. It is why the debates section is  dying.

Hey whiteflame.

AdaptableRatman had a concern he wanted to address with you, regarding the number of trolls driving people away from the site by posting vile content. 

He is arranging a civil protest, and he wanted to get your thoughts on the matter.

Ok, and? We prefer tolerance. If people don’t want to be tolerant, they can leave

What are your thoughts on Adaptable's civil protest?

Alright, let's discuss it then. What policy change would you like to see when it comes to addressing trolls? No trolls at all, or focusing on issues that encompass "vile content"?

Tolerance is an overrated word.

The correct response to abusive or scummy behaviour is to be intolerant of it.

Leave me in charge.

2 weeks.

Whole site will be tamed.

Not going to happen.

I was not asking you. I was speaking of a fact of what would happen. Thank you.

You are solely interested in power. I thought it was popularity but then I realised that is secondary to you. As long as you remain crowned, you do not care what really happens.

It is blatant you punish outcasts harsher. The in-crowd get away with murder.

Good talk.

No it really was not.

And apparently my sarcasm doesn't translate. Good to know.

You say sarcasm, it is merely your chronic lying at play.

And this is why I love our talks.

Case in point.

Alright

Yeah, eventhough you do not debate much, you're very good about voting. Good for you.

That's why we lynch people for being scummy.

@Topic

Though I think 'ideally, it would require more votes, perhaps 10, before clocking out.

Maybe best as an 'option though, when setting up the debate.

'Are always a problem,

Even with voting requirements.

I think I recall some debates on Debate.org, 'never clocking out,

But it doesn't always manage to garner votes.

Is what I tend to set my debates as.

Partially that they 'might gain votes,

Partially allows me to avoid debating for a while.

Though not always, and such 'is extra work, in what perhaps could be solved by changing debate mechanics.

Get votes at times because they're so easy I imagine.

Doesn't seem fair for the person who put in time to have their effort wasted.

Doesn't seem fair 'either though, when 'both individuals put in effort and get no vote, but such is harder to vote on.

I don't think I 'usually vote on forfeit debates, unless there's enough rounds by one of the users, and I actually give my views of their arguments.

I think it already gives those green credit things.

Leaderboard of votes is kind of nice, competitive.

I'm near passing Vader and Sir.Lancelot.

Yeah, its sounds harsh in first blush, but I really agree with intolerance of bad behavior. But that does not really address my #1 on this string, does it?

I agree there's a big issue with debates going unvoted. That's something that we're hoping to address when site ownership changes, which will require changing the way the site is coded, whether that is done by extending voting periods, sending out messages to voters at a certain point when the clock is ticking down, or having the site automatically give points to a side based on a full forfeit. It's something that could be managed to some degree by having one of us regularly check the debates page and send out PMs when time's getting low, but I doubt any of us are going to be that consistent about it.

As for changing the way voting is regarded, that's something I'd like to see too and it will definitely require some changes to how the site is setup.

I appreciated your #25 post here -- some good suggestions. Seems anyone on the first page of the leaderboard [50 members] keying on voting have a pretty good ratio of voting numbers and debate participation numbers, so there appears to be a good corollary there.  But, I also have to agree w/Ratman that Debate, on the whole, seems to be dying, many of the debates are childish fluff with nonsense titles and worse arguments. Stuff like My sock puppet can beat up your sock puppet, and the arguments defer to the frequency of sock puppet purple vomit. I though membership age was min. 13. I'm sure most of these kind ofc layers are older than that, but act like little children. My grandchildren are 14 and 16, and at 13, both were already mature young people.  I hope we can improve the quality of that section of the site.

Thanks. I know with this change-over, things are hectic, so I apprecate your taking the time and will address improvements on the debate side.

You're in the Debate Dev Team discord. While I do see benefits to posting here, gathering feedback, etc., I'd post your distilled ideas into discord.