New New Debater Poll (done properly... again)

[Evil Eye]

Making this because Evil Eye sucks. Also because I suck.

His original message:

Well, it's about that time. Added to the poll are the 4 people who completed the admission requirements for the DH. Below I will link to their posts in the Check-in topic, where members here can review their posts and vote.

Vote for the option that best applies.

The posts:

Kalypso
Dark.Pch

The poll option with the most votes will be admitted.

 

[Sargent_Peach]

I have a few questions, just because I'm curious.

1. So will you be able to see who votes for who?

2. How long will the voting be open for? I thought I read a week somewhere, but I'm not sure.

3. Can they check the polls themselves, or even vote?

 

[Evil Eye]

1. If the checkbox did not deceive me, yep.

2. Indefinitely. Sort of. Within reason, obviously

3. They can. Whether or not we will count their votes is undecided. Thanks to the point addressed in #1, we can discount them if we so choose.

 

[Crimson King]

Let's allow voting until Sunday, say 6pm Central.

 

[Sargent_Peach]

Another question, so "the poll option with the most votes will be added", what exactly does that mean?

If the most people vote for lets say only two, then those two will go? What if another person has a higher percent than one of the two, but more people voted for those two together. Do you get what I'm saying?

 

[Crimson King]

Percentage doesn't matter. We just go by numbers.

Honestly, I think the poll won't work. I'll decide later when EE is available.

 

[lonejedi]

This is just a suggestion, i think it would be alot easier if we did the next batch of temps this way. Why not just open up several polls, one for each person who wants to get in.

Just have two options Yes, or No. It's that simple, and that way it's not pitting them against other debaters.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

I like this yea or nay idea. It would allow people to express their disapproval of the undeserving.

 

[Crimson King]

Expect this to be the last poll, honestly.

For one, I forgot that people can view this room so I don't know if they can vote or not. Secondly, it'd be easier if EE and I just did it ourselves.

 

[Evil Eye]

Let's just amalgamate it. Use these polls to get an idea of how desirable our candidates are, and how Hallers feel about them, then Eric and I have a lengthy chat. Yes?

 

[Sargent_Peach]

Sounds like a perfect idea to me. I don't know why you didn't think of it in the first place EE! LOL

 

[McCloud]

Yeah that sounds better. Also a better idea for people that post well but don't exactly make the cut yet.

 

[Mediocre]

Expect this to be the last poll, honestly.

For one, I forgot that people can view this room so I don't know if they can vote or not. Secondly, it'd be easier if EE and I just did it ourselves.

I logged in as my old profile (which doesn't have debate hall access), and checked whether I could vote in the poll. I couldn't. I could see the results, but it wouldn't let me vote because I didn't have access to the room.

So that's one problem taken care of.

I like the yes/no idea. Actually, why not have a sort of triumvirate? CK gets one vote, EE gets another, and the debaters as a whole get the third. Or maybe not. It's an interesting idea, but probably too much work.

So, yeah, my personal favorite idea for admissions is a simple yes/no for every potential debater. You could do it in one poll with eight options, like so:

Option 1: Poster A Yes
Option 2: Poster A No
Option 3: Poster B Yes
Option 4: Poster B No
Option 5: Poster C Yes
Option 6: Poster C No
Option 7: Poster D Yes
Option 8: Poster D No

That seems like the best solution. People could vote for both the yes or no option, but then their votes would just cancel out, so no worries there.

 

[Crimson King]

Problem with doing that option, Medi, is that if someone reads it wrong and marks one person twice and not at all for one, then we get an issue. Though, I do like the idea of the DH comprising of 1/3rd the overall vote.

Btw, feel free to quote the members post and give them constructive criticism. I know for a fact they are reading this post eagerly.

 

[blazedaces]

I don't know, but this is just a suggestion while keeping in mind a few goals:

Leave it as anonymous as possible and rate as fairly as possible:

First of all, choose a committee, or simply ask a group of debaters who perhaps have been here a while to be the "judges" of incoming posters.

Ask them to look at all of the posts of all the potential debaters, but instead of just linking to the post, just write the text and do not attribute it to any debater. Ask the post to be rated on quality between a 1-10 (or whatever rating system you choose). Tally the points and you get your winner.

I realize people could look up where those "text posts" came from or if they have seen them already they might remember, but this is the best I can think of keeping this goals in mind.

I believe a debater's quality should be judged not by their name or labeled point of view, but rather simply by their post's quality, nothing more.

-blazed

 

[Evil Eye]

That's what we all try to go by, though. Hopefully this room, intended to represent the board's intellectuals, would be mature enough to throw biases out the window.

Your idea ... your heart is in the right place, but it just sounds way too taxing, and leaves plenty of Hallers out of the loop. You get into this room for being smart and showing initiative. Unlike the boards at large, being around a very long time isn't what defines your character.

Honestly though. Forming a panel? Rating ever post?

The idea of all you guys being a third of the vote was a very good idea. This way, all of you have a voice in Hall admissions. We also get three parties on the subject, so there can't be a hung jury, so to speak.

 

[Sargent_Peach]

I also agree that Medi's triumvirate idea is a good one. This would help if CK and EE had a disagreement. Actually it is a good idea, because three judges always work better than two.

As for criticism, I don't have much to say except what I have said earlier. I admire Skylink for taking on such a one sided debate that he just won't win. I think everyone did pretty good, and I was interested in the new topics created. Especially the "Lowering the Drinking age" thread.

Sandtiger- I thought you could have been a little more focused with your posts. They were kinda everywhere and try to back up your opinion with fact.

Really though, I'm no one to listen too, so what I said is not anything that will change the vote. Its just my 2 cents.

 

[Crimson King]

Updated poll. We'll give you guys until Thursday and announce whenever.

 

[Jazzy Jinx]

Ugh... I think your poll is defected...

I never voted and it says I did and the poll states that there is only one vote and it lists it as 6.50 percent of the total votes which doesn't make sense. If there is only one vote, it should be 100 percent, right?

Maybe I'm just missing something or maybe this poll is just screwed up...

 

[Crimson King]

Meh, I don't care anymore. Just say who you vote for and why. **** the poll.

 

[McCloud]

I lawl.

Anyway, my vote is for Kalypso as he seems to have more consistent arguments grounded in somewhat factual information.

And... is Dark Pch the same as Kevin M? cause that's whose posts he's linked to.

 

[lonejedi]

I vote for Kalypso. Sticks to his guns, even when he's losing, and he added alot of activity, int he week he was here.

 

[Eor]

Edit: Didn't see CKs post above

 

[KevinM]

Can i ask why Dark Pch. is linked to me

to answer, no we are not the same person

 

[Digital Watches]

Kalypso. Dark.Pch was fine and all, but kind of weak in his rational argument skills, mostly relying on anecdote.

Kalypso was very solid and perseverent, something we need here. Kalypso for sure.

 

[Skywalker]

I'll go with Kalypso, for the reasons stated above.

 

[Evil Eye]

Kalypso is stubborn without being thick and brings actual opposition, something the room desperately needs. Thumbs up.

 

[Sargent_Peach]

I completely agree with EE. My vote goes to Kalypso. Stubborn and smart, just what we need.

 

[blazedaces]

My vote also goes to Kalypso. For this debate hall he certainly passes, smart and stubborn to put it simply, though I wish he would cite more sources (but I think this about everyone)...

Also, I would say you speculate too much based on personal experience (just because something never happened to you doesn't mean it never happened to anyone of whatever group you're talking about)...

Still think you're a good debater, but this is just some hopefully helpful criticism.

As for dark peach, my vote says no because not even one post cited a source and like said above, too much anecdotal evidence. Reasoning needs a little work too... Sorry dude, but as I truly believe, if you fall off that horse, just get back on, give it another go...

-blazed