| Community Judging Standard - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago The Judging Standard should define what the Pro and Con burdens are by default, and if the debaters would like to redefine the burdens, they should do that for each individual debate. Whether you deci... |
| Community Judging Standard - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago I think it's pretty valid. Say there's a debate where Pro has not upheld the burden of proof (he's failed to give the judge adequate reason to vote for his proposition), but Con has also failed to giv... |
| Community Judging Standard - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago maybe add something about burden of proof? "If the judge evaluates that Pro has failed to prove the resolution true, then he should award the win to Con." or something like that |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago I kinda think that might be the best way to decide which ones are most constructive and helpful |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago What if, during the voting period (not judging period), each judgement was automatically assigned a value based on votes (rather than based on what fields were filled out)? |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago Could it be automated? |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago Maybe even wait to calculate the values of each judgement until after the voting period? |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago Couldnt you remove judgements that were voted complete "vote bombs" even after judging is closed? |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago The problem might be partially solved if there was a period where you could judge, and during that period all previous judgements were hidden, and then after that, a period to vote on judgements, and ... |
| Judging: How should it be done? - Posted by Ab_M 9 years ago I like that idea |