-->
@21Pilots
we don’t really have a number. It depends on how many people apply and how people vote in the voting meep.
MEEP: New moderators, website redesign, new features, and more! [DISCUSSION]
Posts
Pinned
Total:
221
-->
@LucyStarfire
Dont disrespect trans.
Consider this bitch a certified trans disrespecter.
How you gunna respect a nigga in a dress? Come on now, that shit is funny.
-->
@David
Proposition 4: New features
I recently did another thread to brainstorm voting mechanics refinements (separate from enforcement policy refinements). The results of it may be found here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/12859/posts/526041
A few highlights I think would be most worth pursuing:
- Set the defaults to Rated and Winner Selection... Actually, let’s just set logical defaults for everything on the debate creation page: Rated, Pro, either 2 or 3 rounds (and remove the option of 1; since that ain’t a debate), and Open voting.
- Add a new voting system which allows mitigation but does not allow the possibility of fluffing unearned extra points into the chosen winner.
- Refine or remove the categorical voting system.
-->
@David
@Barney
@Vader
@whiteflame
@Savant
I nominate Savant for a mod position. I think he’s a very fair-minded individual who wouldn’t abuse his power. Everyone here respects him as far as I know, and he’s respectful to the entire community. He also said that he has experience in software engineering, so I think he would be an asset in creating new features for the site.
-->
@Castin
I think debateforfun.com, debatefun.com, casual debate.com would be interesting as well
-->
@ILikePie5
Ooh, I like the addition of "fun" to it. This is why I liked Savant's netspat.com. Sounded casual and cute. But I guess I'm the only netspat stan.
DebateGate reminded me of our endless forum scandals and dramas, but maybe that's a little too honest... DebateCraft sounds neat and feels the most similar to DebateArt.
And Savant would make a fine mod.
-->
@Castin
The revolution is coming.
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Against what or who are we revolting?
-->
@Castin
No. People like Whiteflame shift constantly to what they are against.
I am not against, I am for justice and a better website community.
You can be tamed, polite, courteous and somewhat caring or get out. That is as simple as it needs to be. Me included.
I am for justice and a better website community
So am I.
-->
@Castin
@David
@Barney
@fauxlaw
@WyIted
Debattle.com (domain for sale quite cheap)
Debattle.org (seems unowned)
If you purchase .edu especially or .org educational institutions become open to it. That will require a cleanup. Dethrone WF instantly, promote me, let's do this.
Aryuecrazy.com
Argyoucrazy.com
If we want casual and pun.
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Why are you trying to usurp WF exactly?
-->
@Ultracrepidarian
It is stated why very clearly in the post you replied to.
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I'm in if I can be your puppet leader.
-->
@Ultracrepidarian
Tell me all your account names
-->
@Ultracrepidarian
He’s mad because WF is actually a good mod and because he can’t be an authoritarian
-->
@Mikal
Precisely.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Are you still against renaming the website?
I wonder how many Debate platforms have tried reaching out to big name people,
Surely big name people debate 'somewhere, other than on TV and College?
Or might want to encourage people to try a debate platform?
-->
@Lemming
I wonder how many Debate platforms have tried reaching out to big name people
Thats a retarded strategy. On YouTube, if you want subscribers, you reach out to small channels, not big channels. Likewise, in advertising, you dont advertise to big names, but ordinary people.
-->
@LucyStarfire
Wouldn't bigger names mean bigger exposure?
-->
@Lemming
Wouldn't bigger names mean bigger exposure?
No, because you are just putting in the middle man.
You want ordinary people, yet your strategy is to bring big names which will then maybe bring ordinary people.
Just remove the middle man, and advertise directly to ordinary people.
Big names dont even care enough to come here.
Literally just pay YouTube or some popular app to advertise this site and you will get users. Its not rocket science. People see, people come.
Making them stay is other issue, but right now this site has no any advertisement either. There are even ways to advertise for free, but people dont do that here either. I dont care enough about this site to make YouTube channel designed to advertise it. But some people said they were gonna make a channel so that could bring few users.
-->
@LucyStarfire
I would think a 'community channel would make the most sense, where members can submit videos to be approved for the community YouTube channel.
I think advertising directly to ordinary people can be expensive,
While on the other hand, Big Names might think it would make good content or do good to society to encourage debate,
Some people are just Big Names in Entertainment,
Others are Big Names in Debating.
Either way, the name drop of DART, seems to me advantageous to us, 'especially if we can convince many Big Names, to use the site, brief or long, without us paying the Big Names.
-->
@Lemming
I think advertising directly to ordinary people can be expensive
There are free ways to advertise. I advertise my YouTube channel by making my subscriptions public, not private, and then subscribing to 1000 people so they get notified of it. Also commenting on channels. It is literally free advertising.
While on the other hand, Big Names
You guys were trying to bring these big names for years now. I dont see any. So maybe drop the failed strategy and do what everyone else does.
-->
@LucyStarfire
Any idea who they try to bring in and how?
-->
@Lemming
Also, it costs around $2,000 on average to reach 100,000 views of your YouTube ad.
So basically, 200$ will get you 10,000 views. If you cant pay 200$ every 6 months (35$ per month), then maybe no need to dream big.
-->
@Lemming
Any idea who they try to bring in and how?
The last one I remember was some popular pro-anarchy professor who then refused to come.
-->
@LucyStarfire
I usually hate and ignore ads, myself.
Even at times when they are something I 'might be interested in.
Even when interested, it's often in one ear and out the other.
Well, I've None At All reading on advertising, so I don't have 'strong opinions on the subject.
-->
@Lemming
I usually hate and ignore ads, myself
Some people ignore, some people dont. It also depends on ads. If you make it look boring, then yeah people will just skip it. I dont really think that right now this site has anything to offer. Even if person comes, person will leave due to unsupportive environment. But all big apps do advertisement A LOT. Like, I downloaded that Temu app due to such good ads.
There is one more thing I want to add to this MEEP: Should debates that are full forfeited on all sides be deleted?