Board Thread:Debate of The Week/@comment-28112409-20171002232846/@comment-28112409-20171010055754

Anons unite wrote: let's say a judge thinks mafia is in fact better. While they skim over the debate, they are biased definitely towrds the side they think. confirmation bias is just how the brain works. so i say we should just debate for fun OR have vert be the only judge See, this is where the problem comes...

I have to deal with 2 parts of the people debating here. One part wants to see results, and that's what attracts them, a goal to work for so their debating is not half-assed. The other part wants to debate for fun, and they are having it because the reward for winning the debate is no big deal.

I know for damn sure that I don't have confirmation bias because I use a points system for judging, similar to how my judges in debating used to do for attacks, defenses, and counters. The other judges could indeed be biased as you say, but I dunno what to do honestly.

Me being the only judge, I dunno about that. 1 sole person deciding the winner, I'm not sure if that's a good idea. "Debating for fun" implies to me that you want whatever sort of rewards there are to be removed and no winner to be decided, which will actually piss off a portion of the people joining in this activity including some of those who are good.