Upcoming Referendum: Updated Voting Policy!

Author: Barney 3 years ago

Crowdsourcing

MEEP

Voting Policy

Posts

Total: 67

#61

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,282

3RU7AL

02.07.2021 12:07AM

-->

@RationalMadman

DETECTING MOTIVE IS FUNCTIONALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM WITCHCRAFT.
Not really, all professional detectives (profilers being the absolute specialist detectives in that field) and judges do it and measure it into how they proceed. Not to mention psychiatrists, therapists etc.

That’s right. Psychology isn’t science.

Why can we definitively say that? Because psychology does not meet the five basic requirements for a field to be considered scientifically rigorous: clearly defined terminology, quantifiability, highly controlled experimental conditions, reproducibility and, finally, predictability and testability. [**]

#62

RationalMadman

Debates: 564

Posts: 19,896

RationalMadman

02.07.2021 12:58AM

-->

@3RU7AL

Psychology is the most complex science in terms of the nuances and how to apply it. Everything that is involved with 'soft sciences' like psychology, game theory and other things like CGI in movies is in fact more, not less, demanding on the brain than high level physics, chem etc. The reason behind this is that it demands extreme combination of all elements within the mind as well as multiple types of thinking.

A psychologist doesn't simply go 'poof I know', they use reasoning and facts that are concrete and then use them in ways that are creative and intuitive. The fact there is no guarantee when one uses their algorithms that indeed are scientific in how they're reached, is because beyond the concrete algorithms which help estimation, comes experience and wisdom in the field that leads to higher accuracy and precision.

You can say 'humbug, it's not real science' but entire wars, criminal syndicates and many more such things have been either won or prevented by effective masters/gurus of these fields.

While master and guru are typically 'masculine' they are in fact gender-neutral if you properly understand the terms. So, I am including female experts.

#63

Vader

Debates: 30

Posts: 14,585

Vader

02.07.2021 04:28AM

-->

@Barney

There's policies I'd like to change about RO's. I believe moderation should not excessively enforce RO's unless they directly violate the purpose. I also believe they should be less commonly given than they are. I believe thus are adequate reforms to the entire system of RO's. While ideally, I believe this website should remove the entirety of RO, there seems to be a demand for some users to obtain, and thus I will suggest reforms that can be made

First, I believe obtaining an RO or receiving a RO should be harder to obtain than it is now. This site is about expressing freedom of speech. If you dislike someone then that is life. Ignore this user. If you ignore them and they repeatedly follow you, you have enough evidence to claim an RO. This site is about freedom of speech and being comfortable to share our views. To restrict others is being blind and we shouldn't encourage others to do so

Another thing is that restraining orders should not be 90 day long limitations. The most an RO should be is 30 days, as that allows the users to calm down enough to think logically, while not being overly destructive of freedom.

Here are some reforms I have made to make a clear way of RO violations. Right now the definitions are as loose as a plate of jello, so I decided to beef them up into what I think is the ideal standard.

The A-H Rule Reform of Restraining Orders on DebateArt.com

A) If a person comments on the restrained users original thread that is not a DIRECT response to that person AND/OR is in response to another user that is NOT the user RO'd and the thread itself is a tame/vanilla topic, that user is not warned or punished
----A1) If a person comments on the restrained users original thread that is not a DIRECT response to that person AND/OR is in response to another user that is NOT the user RO'd, but the thread itself is a topic of conflict (religion/politics), that user is not warned or punished, but is reminded to remain cautious of the RO.

B) If a person comments on the restrained users original thread that is not a DIRECT response to that person, but the moderation team concludes there is enough evidence to warrant that user was looking for a reaction out of the restrained user, that user will receive a warning

C) If a person comments on the restrained users original thread that is a DIRECT response, but is not malice, that user is will be notified but no warn will be given

D) If a person comments on the restrained users original thread that is a DIRECT response and there is enough evidence that said user was in malice or response, that user will receive a warn

EXCESSIVE REPETTITION OF WARNS DUE TO VIOLATIONS OF A-D WILL RESULT IN A 3 DAY BAN
======================

E) If a person comments on the restrained users original threat is a DIRECT response and a situation has escalated due the post made being egregious enough to violate the basic terms of the CoC, that user is subjected to a 7-day ban.

F) If a person replies DIRECTLY to a restrained user in a different thread with no malice, that user will receive a warning

EXCESSIVE REPETTITION OF WARNS DUE TO VIOLATIONS OF F WILL RESULT IN A 3 DAY BAN

G) If a person replies DIRECTLY to a restrained user in a different thread and there is enough evidence that said user was in malice, that user will be subjected to a 3-day ban

H) If a person replies DIRECTLY to a restrained user in a different thread and a situation has escalated due the post made being egregious enough to violate the basic terms of the CoC, that user is subjected to a 14-day ban

Topic's author

#64

Barney

Debates: 50

Posts: 2,879

Barney

02.07.2021 06:14AM

-->

@Athias

Do you actually have any refinements to suggest?
Yes: cognizant moderators who are knowledgeable about the subject which they presume to regulate.

Thank you for your feedback. Ensuring the moderators are both knowledgeable and again knowledgeable about the site policies and enforcement thereof, is such a high priority it has already been preemptively taken care of for you. You're welcome.

#65

Athias

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

Athias

02.07.2021 03:24PM

-->

@Barney

Ensuring the moderators are both knowledgeable and again knowledgeable about the site policies and enforcement thereof, is such a high priority it has already been preemptively taken care of for you.

You have done nothing "for me." Do it for the site; do it for your position; do it for maintaining a decorum that facilitates proper debate. And by the way, that unwitting, puerile repetition of the term "knowledgeable" further demonstrates your ignorance. Cognizant has a few meanings. If you weren't so set on your attempt to "show me up" on the use of my terms in that last statement, you may have come across its other meanings when you were looking up the term cognizant. I'm always cognizant of the words I use, their meanings, and the manner in which I apply them (see what I did there?)

You're welcome.

I don't remember thanking you.

#66

Athias

Debates: 20

Posts: 3,192

Athias

02.07.2021 03:34PM

-->

@RationalMadman

Psychology is the most complex science in terms of the nuances and how to apply it. Everything that is involved with 'soft sciences' like psychology, game theory and other things like CGI in movies is in fact more, not less, demanding on the brain than high level physics, chem etc. The reason behind this is that it demands extreme combination of all elements within the mind as well as multiple types of thinking.

A psychologist doesn't simply go 'poof I know', they use reasoning and facts that are concrete and then use them in ways that are creative and intuitive. The fact there is no guarantee when one uses their algorithms that indeed are scientific in how they're reached, is because beyond the concrete algorithms which help estimation, comes experience and wisdom in the field that leads to higher accuracy and precision.

You can say 'humbug, it's not real science' but entire wars, criminal syndicates and many more such things have been either won or prevented by effective masters/gurus of these fields.

While master and guru are typically 'masculine' they are in fact gender-neutral if you properly understand the terms. So, I am including female experts.

Psychology isn't a science because it cannot substantiate its controls and reproduce its results with a low margin of error. It attempts to pathologize aberrant behavior by creating symptoms that are so broad that it is inconsequential to even categorize them.

39 days later

#67

3RU7AL

Debates: 3

Posts: 13,282

3RU7AL

03.19.2021 11:24AM

-->

@Athias

If the BoP is determined by the whim of the instigator, then there really is no point to the rules. This notion is completely lost on the moderators--correction: a couple of the moderators. Onus Probandi determines the responsibility each participant bears in the resolution of the argument; not the instigators stipulations. You know that, I know that; but if the "moderators" don't know that, then we're "violating voting policy" if their ignorance isn't displayed in our RFD's. And what makes matters worse is when one clearly knows--I suppose for lack of a better term--"more" than the moderators do on the subject, and gets penalized for it.

Well stated.