Intrinsically, I don't desire to gain a rating from this, I just want the distinction between this, and other potential cases of moderators altering debates after they have started. If there is none, this is a very bad thing to allow moderators to do, if there is one my aversion can be regarded as immaterial.
Wait a second...if a moderator can alter a debate after it has started, what is a symmetry breaker between this decision, and a moderator altering the character count, or the time for argument? This is a peculiar power to grant, and I don't see any reason why this change should have been permitted. Thus, I request it be reverted immediately.
I would not draw attention to him, I have come to find out that he thrives off it. That is to say, I am not interested in feeding the troll any longer. My interest only extends to debating, and if all I am going to get is dodges and incoherent rambles, even solely interacting becomes a waste of time.
Vici did not appear to be backing out, but seems to be stating that Barney would be too scared to even accept the challenge, so there is no point in wasting such time/giving him the attention. This is something I can generally agree with as someone Barney is scared of debating.
Unfortunately, I am down to 3 hours for this debate, as well as this collection of similar ones which all require extremely easy RFD's, with no votes. Are any of you able to vote here? (all links to similar debates are below)
I have 4 debates and 8 hours.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3755-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3756-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3762-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3754-you-pick-the-topic
I am in critical need of a vote at this point of time, can anyone please vote for these debates? They are extremely rudimentary decisions.
I was informed that this was logically possible within the site, however, the moderator who revealed this information to me what whiteflame, and considering how incompetent he is, it is not unexpected that he would display ignorance of what will and will not be upheld on this platform.
And there could be underlying reasons people vote to protect Oromagi and Barney as well. They could be personal, or more so emotional. For instance, ther may be voters who are not willing to do anything that may introduce the risk of upsetting them because that is clearly one of the worst things that could happen. The fact of the matter is, it is a peculiar issue. Because of this, all of my subsequent debates will have rules that bar certain people from voting. These rules will be purposed towards preventing the expressions of incompetent people from influencing the outcome of a given debate. Some examples of people who I would, as a general rule, note to ban from voting are Barney, Oromagi, FLRW, Shila, etc. all of which are trolls who lack understanding of basic logic.
I need a vote for this debate, as well as this similar one (https://www.debateart.com/debates/3754-you-pick-the-topic). Also for anyone given that there are 16 hours left (please make an RFD that meets the standards so it is not removed after being mass reported)
In addition to Vici, here are some people who actually know what they are talking about in philosophy. They are good candidates to vote on this debate, so I am mentioning them in case they ever come around to.
Well, people keep reporting all the votes cast for me in this debate.
There are 30 minutes left as of now. I apologize for the sudden mention, this is just a last effort to get a vote for this to avoid a no-vote tie here.
I had a feeling more people would be challenging Oromagi once they realized he is not a particularly good debater. However, I will note that it takes a lot to get him to accept debates as opposed to dodging them (same with many top debaters here). My suggestion is to ignore any tangents and get straight to the point.
There is grudge voting going on here, as it seems. I now am in need of two votes, one of which being geared towards counter balancing instantiated incompetence.
I would appreciate it if you could assist.
Well, thanks for telling me in advance at least. I just don't understand the vote here, and it seems almost certainly to be an emotional outburst in response to previous events.
It appears that the current vote that established the conclusion of this debate simply constitutes a collection of nonsense. I am not sure what to do about it given that the debate has concluded, but I want an appreciation of this situation.
What type of vote is this? I suppose this is some form of retaliation for a recent defeat (https://www.debateart.com/debates/3775-the-majority-of-animal-agriculture-in-the-united-states-is-slavery-for-atoromagi) but this is very irritating to say the least.
I have no idea why you take such concern with me banning trolls from voting on my debates. I would have though we would agree on this.
I can make Bop shared
Intrinsically, I don't desire to gain a rating from this, I just want the distinction between this, and other potential cases of moderators altering debates after they have started. If there is none, this is a very bad thing to allow moderators to do, if there is one my aversion can be regarded as immaterial.
(mentioning only competent moderators) please change the debate back to "rated."
Wait a second...if a moderator can alter a debate after it has started, what is a symmetry breaker between this decision, and a moderator altering the character count, or the time for argument? This is a peculiar power to grant, and I don't see any reason why this change should have been permitted. Thus, I request it be reverted immediately.
Given that this debate seems to be going nowhere, there may be utility in its replication.
I would not draw attention to him, I have come to find out that he thrives off it. That is to say, I am not interested in feeding the troll any longer. My interest only extends to debating, and if all I am going to get is dodges and incoherent rambles, even solely interacting becomes a waste of time.
Vici did not appear to be backing out, but seems to be stating that Barney would be too scared to even accept the challenge, so there is no point in wasting such time/giving him the attention. This is something I can generally agree with as someone Barney is scared of debating.
Just forfeit/pass all the rounds already. I struggle to understand why you are wasting my time.
This is the last debate I need votes for.
Okay, so let me see exactly what the claims here are.
C1 "You had to prove reading should not be made illegal"
This is wrong, Mall holds the burden of proof.
Do you agree with this correction (yes/no)?
I don't understand why you are doing this, you know what you wrote here makes no sense.
Thanks for voting on this debate.
Two hours left, please vote.
2 hours left. Please vote.
2 hours left. Please vote.
2 hours left. Please vote.
Down to 3 hours.
Unfortunately, I am down to 3 hours for this debate, as well as this collection of similar ones which all require extremely easy RFD's, with no votes. Are any of you able to vote here? (all links to similar debates are below)
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3742-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3744-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3757-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3758-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3760-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3761-you-pick-the-topic
I just wanted to move this up given that I currently have 5 hours left.
I really need a vote for this debate. 12 hours left.
Any vote would be appreciated for this debate.
12 hours left with no votes.
Votes needed here.
Noting for time purposes, 12 hours, no votes.
Voted needed here.
8 hours left, and no votes. Please, if you are to vote, make sure your vote meets the voting policy standards. It does not take much.
8 hours left at this time.
I have 4 debates and 8 hours.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3755-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3756-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3762-you-pick-the-topic
https://www.debateart.com/debates/3754-you-pick-the-topic
I am in critical need of a vote at this point of time, can anyone please vote for these debates? They are extremely rudimentary decisions.
I was informed that this was logically possible within the site, however, the moderator who revealed this information to me what whiteflame, and considering how incompetent he is, it is not unexpected that he would display ignorance of what will and will not be upheld on this platform.
Well, I was being sarcastic if not apparent.
And there could be underlying reasons people vote to protect Oromagi and Barney as well. They could be personal, or more so emotional. For instance, ther may be voters who are not willing to do anything that may introduce the risk of upsetting them because that is clearly one of the worst things that could happen. The fact of the matter is, it is a peculiar issue. Because of this, all of my subsequent debates will have rules that bar certain people from voting. These rules will be purposed towards preventing the expressions of incompetent people from influencing the outcome of a given debate. Some examples of people who I would, as a general rule, note to ban from voting are Barney, Oromagi, FLRW, Shila, etc. all of which are trolls who lack understanding of basic logic.
Votes are still needed.
I need a vote for this debate, as well as this similar one (https://www.debateart.com/debates/3754-you-pick-the-topic). Also for anyone given that there are 16 hours left (please make an RFD that meets the standards so it is not removed after being mass reported)
Vote needed here, 1 day left.
Vote needed here, 1 day left.
In addition to Vici, here are some people who actually know what they are talking about in philosophy. They are good candidates to vote on this debate, so I am mentioning them in case they ever come around to.
Well, people keep reporting all the votes cast for me in this debate.
There are 30 minutes left as of now. I apologize for the sudden mention, this is just a last effort to get a vote for this to avoid a no-vote tie here.
I had a feeling more people would be challenging Oromagi once they realized he is not a particularly good debater. However, I will note that it takes a lot to get him to accept debates as opposed to dodging them (same with many top debaters here). My suggestion is to ignore any tangents and get straight to the point.
I need a vote for this debate, so hopefully one of you will see this within 10 hours.
Can you possibly re-cast this vote, but with additional analysis to satisfy the moderators?
There is grudge voting going on here, as it seems. I now am in need of two votes, one of which being geared towards counter balancing instantiated incompetence.
I would appreciate it if you could assist.
Well, thanks for telling me in advance at least. I just don't understand the vote here, and it seems almost certainly to be an emotional outburst in response to previous events.
It appears that the current vote that established the conclusion of this debate simply constitutes a collection of nonsense. I am not sure what to do about it given that the debate has concluded, but I want an appreciation of this situation.
What type of vote is this? I suppose this is some form of retaliation for a recent defeat (https://www.debateart.com/debates/3775-the-majority-of-animal-agriculture-in-the-united-states-is-slavery-for-atoromagi) but this is very irritating to say the least.
10 hours remaining
Oh sorry, it seems as if your rank is too low to accept this debate. The instigator made it limited to "1501," and being new, you are at 1500.
I am sure you can accept, but as you can see, others have expressed interest in this.
I need a vote for this. 1 day left.
Thanks a lot, I was worried.