As many of you know, I have been on a 2 month long hiatus and recently returned. Upon my return I havent noticed many changes. The new layout is still here, and alot of the elite members are still gone. But the site is still what it is: a place for people to come and debate (TD), write opinionated columns about anything related to sports or FanNation (blogs), and conversing with other people (threads).
But also upon my return, I have taken on a new goal: to straighten this site out from all its ills. Now this might be an impossible task, but if nobody tries, no attempts at progress can be made.
I start with the "policy" of vote changing.
Changing votes is most certainly an option, and I have even changed my votes on several occasions. But during my hiatus, and while thinking about how I could make the site better upon my return, I realized something about changing votes: it damages the integrity of the TD.
How does it do that? You may wonder. Let me give you a practical example.
Recently, we had our presidential election. Now think of TDs as campaigns. In a normal election campaign, there are primaries. The candidates make their values known, and people vote according to what they hear and think is the best strategy or angle for the nation to go in. That can be likened to the opening arguments.
Then through the primaries, we hear all sorts of arguments and points being brought up, and we form our own generalizations about the candidates and their policies.
Then the actual election happens, and what do we do? We vote based on arguments and what we HEAR. And we are NOT allowed to CHANGE our vote once we have voted. Doing that would surely damage the integrity of the election.
Yet, we hear the arguments in a TD, we vote and then say something like "My vote is changeable." Really? NO IT'S NOT! I say if you are not sure which way to vote, don't cast a vote until all arguments are expressed, because whether tha vote gets changed or not, it damages the integrity of the TD, and it does so in 2 ways.
1. It either forces a loss upon the person who originally received the vote but then lost it later. And all that means is that changing the vote is a form of RIGGING. We have the nerve to accuse people of cheating by stealing arguments, plagiarizing, etc. and yet we help those people we accuse by changing our vote.
I have been guilty of this, I admit, so I am not coming at this from a "holier than thou" angle.
2. Changing the vote influences how others vote. Example: if Person A is involved in a TD with person B, and I say "I will vote for Person B for NOW, but maybe later will change it", when other voters go on and see that vote, more often than not, people will be inclined to vote that way because they realize that someone else thought that viewpoint was appealing. So they just follow the leader, so to speak.
I also have been guilty of this too.
But in my attempts to cure and rid this site of everything that is wrong with it (because yes, we want this to be fun, but sometimes in order for it to be fun, it needs to be done right), I propose the following:
1. Voting before the arguments are completed is not wrong. I decided who I was going to vote for as president before they even had the Presidential debates.
2. Voting after arguments is also not wrong.
3. Changing the vote, in my opinion, is wrong. It damages the integrity fo the TD in multiple ways. If you aren't sure how to vote, save it until the end.
4. Voting according to bias IS wrong. We cannot vote based on preconceived opinions but on rather what the arguments ARE and what they SAY.
5. Because vote changing is damaging to the integrity of the TD, should you feel the need to vote before the arguments are complete and then realize later you made a mistake, too bad. Someone who voted for Obama two years later can't say "Oh I made a mistake and want to switch my vote to McCain." It doesn't work like that, friends. So don't change your vote even if you realized it was the wrong one.
I know alot of people on this site won't like this blog, but in order for this to work and in order to make this site better, everyone's cooperation will be needed, whether they like it or not.
I would appreciate everyone's cooperation in the name of progress. If you choose not to cooperate, then that's fine, but expect to get lashed at by me and other respected members in TDs. Because personally, I will no longer tolerate vote changing.
Thank you.
Esti Ginzberg
Cintia Dicker.jpg)
Best NFL Single-Season Streaks
Tweets of the Week
Comments (12) Add A Comment
When I see a TD, I initially have an opinion based on the title. I think everyone does - that's what forces us to click on it in the first place. Then - when it's clicked on, you can tell (unless it's a list first) whether there is a chance to sway your opinion.
This is why it always bugs me when people say vote on arguments vs. opinions - we ALL have opinions when we first click on the TD. It's just natural people.
On the other hand, the vote changing I disagree with - I don't vote until it's done (unless it's ridiculously one sided dominance). And often times, I come back and find that it's totally lopsided so I don't vote at all. But it does make you wonder how that lopsided vote happened... initially with the right to change or after all arguments were complete.
LoveItHateIt
Portland, OR
Total Comments (3161)
Nice blog.
I generally wait until all arguments are posted before I vote, unless the early arguments are so one-sided that there's not much reason to wait. I can say that I haven't changed my vote yet, but then again, I'm pretty much a noob here.
There have been a few occasions where I pretty much had my mind made up before even looking at the arguments, but there were persuasive arguments made by the side I opposed. I ended up not voting on those occasions.
Rocktman
Cincinnati, OH
Total Comments (1524)
The real thing we need is there to BE no capability to vote before all the arguments are in... to play on your electon-year analogy, I wasn't allowed to make my presidential choice back in April or August... so why should I be able to vote on a throwdown after just one or two arguments (which oftentimes are mere set-up for the finale)?!
Pertinent points you bring up, Gonets... good to see you back on the site, hope life is treating you well, and keep up the good fight...
Bigalke
Springfield, OR
Total Comments (22305)
I'm glad you brought up the election analogy, because I'm gonna run with that to support my people shouldn't vote based only on arguements debate. When you vote for a politician, you look at the issues, what does he believe in what does he want to get accomplished, if you agree with this, you vote for him. End of story, who cares if his arguement for why those issues are better weren't constructed as well as the other candidate...the issue is still the issue no matter how you argue it.
Now, don't get me wrong, on a TD, if someone were to just take a side, then have completely nonsensical rants that have nothing to do with anything...I would vote based ont he quality of the arguement.
As long as the pastor preaching to me is saying what I want to hear, I dont care if his sermon isn't eloquent or constructed in an organized manner.
Having said all that, a small part of your vote should be based on the arguement, because some people on here just have no clue what they are talking about...and they shouldnt ever win a TD, but I believe if the arguement is even HALFway good, I'm taking the guy that has the same opinion as me.
DCforkIN'em
Total Comments (479)
Bigalke is right...I mean,for those of you that care about each round of the arguements. Yeah though, you should definetly wait for all the facts and information to be stated before you vote. That is, if you are voting based on how skilled the debater was in his arguement...otherwise, if your like me, who cares.
DCforkIN'em
Total Comments (479)
If you don't wait to vote until all arguments are in, voting and then changing your vote is fine.
I sometimes like to vote after each round of arguments (that's the key, each person must make their argument for each round). Kinda like a scorecard in boxing - I vote based on who I think is ahead at the time. Also, if I'm not going to be on for the weekend etc, a vote after 1 round is better than no vote at all.
rstowe
Newport News , VA
Total Comments (47232)
My vote often changes mid-argument if someone counterpunches well. I can't say I go back and revisit every TD multiple times, particularly if it is a slam dunk win in my opinion.
What would really improve the site is if folks would vote based on their own read of the TD, not on the opinions of others.
TFo's Revenge
Championships, YO
Total Comments (8383)
i agree with this point stowe, but voting based on who has the lead and voting just for the sake of it and not really knowing who you want to vote for is a different deal.
gonets
Lewisville, TX
Total Comments (7670)
If TDing is a debate, then the debate should be concluded before voting begins. I know a lot people vote on the title, vote for friends, vote against people they don't like. If I see a TD and all arguments are in and the score is 40-2, why bother voting. The first thing that has to be done is to STOP all the alters and dupe accounts from voting, otherwise the TD's are useless fun for the "cheaters."
Foxy's Back
Total Comments (11708)
This was a great blog. However, I disagree that the "elite" members of FanNation are "still gone." If you are an elite of anything you dont abandon ship. When the new format kicked in, it just forced the fat to be trimmed from the people to can adapt to change, and eliminated the weak folks that cant or wont accept change. I think FanNation is a stronger site now that the new format shed the site winners from the dead weight of having to carry its losers.
Cassidy's House:…
Whatsittoya, NO
Total Comments (16281)
I like to vote when its finished but sometimes its so lopsided i have to cast the vote earlier. When people end of forfeiting i usually will change the vote. But when the weekend comes i usually dont make the same vote casting because on the weekend i try to get the vote in since i dont generally log in on the weekend.
Joe Dew
Idaho Falls , ID
Total Comments (8069)
If you voted early, it's generally a mistake. (as it's a disservice to both TDers if the arguments are generally close)
The ability to change one's vote later on (when the arguments are complete) allows somebody to correct their earlier mistake and vote for the person who has presented the best overall case.
I wish they'd turn the voting off until the end (of at least until say after 2 args each) but I don't think the vote changing is really that big of a deal overall and I think the positives balance out the negatives.
YODA
Total Comments (16866)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.