Elite debates league

Author: DebateArt.com ,

Posts

Total: 46
DebateArt.com
DebateArt.com's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,252
3
3
8
DebateArt.com's avatar
DebateArt.com
3
3
8
I am having another random idea that I wanted to discuss.

So as you can see in the debates section, we have lots of low quality debates, like the ones that type1 spammed or just forfeited ones or that kinda stuff, so I am thinking if it makes sense to create a separate elite "league", in which only "serious" debaters would be invited and they'd have separate ratings, separate everything, because it doesn't really makes sense that people that spend hours on their arguments compete with people saying that ducks are dangerous. And what we have now could be a sandbox for the new people to prove (or to learn) that they deserve to be invited to the elite league. Obviously it raises some questions but it's a random idea and I haven't given it much thought but I'd still like to hear your comments.

So, what do you think?
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,153
2
3
4
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
2
3
4
--> @DebateArt.com
I don't debate formally on these sites, but that sounds like a good idea. 
DebateArt.com
DebateArt.com's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,252
3
3
8
DebateArt.com's avatar
DebateArt.com
3
3
8
--> @Outplayz
Yeah, I think we'd need to have something like that in one form or another. 
David
David's avatar
Debates: 83
Posts: 1,203
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
I support this 110%!

ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,474
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
It's a great idea. (goes well with the Art in debate art) but you would have to make sure that spotty vote moderation didn't kill it.
David
David's avatar
Debates: 83
Posts: 1,203
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
--> @ethang5
for an elite debate we could potentially create a serpersre voting standard or at least discuss how we should apply the rules. 
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,474
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
--> @David
This is an excellent idea with a lot of potential. I never debate but would consider it if the quality of the debates were better. Many others would too.
David
David's avatar
Debates: 83
Posts: 1,203
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
--> @ethang5
IMO we would attract better and more people if we had higher quality debates and more good votes. 

SupaDudz
SupaDudz's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 12,633
5
8
11
SupaDudz's avatar
SupaDudz
5
8
11
I am down, but we should set a defined standard of "elite" before we start going out there and wildly calling things elite
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,474
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
--> @David
I totally agree. The people who don't debate sometimes underestimate the value of debate to the site. I think it is the search for good debates that first draws people here.



ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,474
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
To discourage people from simply voting thumbs up on topics with which they agree, (and verse versa) have a scaled voting system.

Each elite will state his political, social, religious, etc, position, and positive votes against his position will carry more points than votes for his position.
David
David's avatar
Debates: 83
Posts: 1,203
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
--> @ethang5
i like this idea a lot. 
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
On DDO, I was usaully annoyed if somebody who wasn't on the first page accepted my debates, unless it was fuzzycat, he was a terrible debater who managed to be on the front page, and was only interested in debating truisms against obviously weak opponents.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
--> @DebateArt.com
How does one qualify for inclusion?

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
--> @bsh1
My suggestion is invitation only. Start with somebody such as yourself, and you got one invite. Use it wisely, now that person has one invite he needs to use wisely and so on and so on.
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
--> @Wylted
Not a bad suggestion.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
thanks
ArgentTongue
ArgentTongue's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 124
0
1
5
ArgentTongue's avatar
ArgentTongue
0
1
5
--> @bsh1
In theory, that suggestion could work, but not in practice. Assuming the invite can circulate among one group of elite individuals, all it would take would be for that invitation to go viral, and soon the torch has been passed to people who are not as deserving nor as trustworthy. Perhaps you can try and vet people coming into the league, but eventually the influx will get out of control. I think there should be a starting cabal of top debate users who can deliberate on who to let in. Place the ability to invite with one central authority.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
--> @ArgentTongue
What about a series of 8 person tournaments. One tournament a month, and the winner of the tournament gets into the league. This can be done monthly, and it would be a true meritocracy

ArgentTongue
ArgentTongue's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 124
0
1
5
ArgentTongue's avatar
ArgentTongue
0
1
5
--> @Wylted
I think that is a far better idea. And so long as the moderation of tournaments is trusted a central and honorable authority, that might be the best manner through which to induct new members.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
Honestly argent, most people would not even exercise their invite once the group had about 10 people in it. Plus your peers will give you a ton of shit for inviting the wrong person in if you do
David
David's avatar
Debates: 83
Posts: 1,203
4
7
10
David's avatar
David
4
7
10
--> @Wylted
I like that idea. 

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
I know once I got an invite, whoever did that will be quite unpopular.
ArgentTongue
ArgentTongue's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 124
0
1
5
ArgentTongue's avatar
ArgentTongue
0
1
5
--> @Wylted
Ah, but there is no way to guarantee the group would be restricted to that number and the mistake would not be made. That is, assuming you do not add more regulations, which would be necessary. All it would take would be one misstep and the entire system goes into a state of shock and disorder.
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 26
Posts: 2,829
3
4
9
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
9
--> @ArgentTongue
You're just being a cynic.

Ah, but there is no way to guarantee the group would be restricted to that number and the mistake would not be made
It shouldn't be restricted to that number, it should be constantly growing, and merely used as a tool so people can have fun debates without effecting their true rating, and have an area where only serious debates exist so that you don't have to sift through so much garbage.

All it would take would be one misstep and the entire system goes into a state of shock and disorder.

It's not some fragile ecosystem. You can have plenty of missteps and be fine. I think you fear some chain reaction, like some idiot gets invited in and that idiot invites the next one, and so on and so on. I just don't see that occurring. There would be some percieved risk of that voting for somebody such as myself, but honestly my vote would only be used to get some under appreciated serious debater into the circle such as Zarroette.

Even if some smart ass gives some idiot an invite, even idiots hate idiots, so it will likely remain an isolated incident and not set off some chain reaction.