GTP Mass-Debating Contest Thread!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danny
  • 337 comments
  • 17,293 views
Jjacks
Will the judging be based around a certain criteria or will it be based on the judges to depict their own methods or will the judges work together as a team to come to a final decision?

Judging could be like the American democracy. The panel of judges will give favor to one side as opposed to the other. A count is then taken by the appointed judge to make the call. In a way sort of like our own judicial system where majority rules.
Click to expand...

Own method depiction, and majority vote wins.

And the judges list has been amended and is now complete :)

Slicks
I'd be willing to put in an effort as a judge, primarily because I don't have the time to be on a team.

There was concern about where to put these threads, so how about creating a temporary sub-forum in the Rumble Strip for them?

Finally, I think that two hundred words is not enough to put together a point for a debate. I think it should be three hundred minimum, four-fifty maximum.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer slicks, but we have the necessary 5 judges though.

Creating a subforum might be a good idea, I'll PM Jordan.

And the word limit has since been amended to 400.
 
So the teams then, have you decided if we're going to attach ourselves to one or are you choosing team leaders then pulling names out of a hat so to speak?
 
Team List.
TEAMS.jpg


Following a suggestion from live4speed, I picked a few prominent (for want of a better word) members for seperate teams, and randomly placed the rest into teams of three.

Team A: Duke, Small_Fryz and Bee.
Team B:Famine, CCX and MatttheTuner
Team C:danoff, live4speed and kennythebomb
Team D:FoolKiller, Swift and MachOne
Team E:Blake, Touring Mars and Casio
Team F:amp88, Silverzone and TheCracker.

Feel free to request a team name change.
Conspire amongst yourselves.
 
Im with the fampedia!
and mattthetuner!


thank you god
 
*does a little dance*

Foolkiller + Swift = Good for me. Team E definitely has some strong players as well.

Good luck to all ;).

PS: When do we start?

PSS: Any idea for our first topic?
 
yeah your team looks pretty good aswell!

im with famine coz poeple reckon im a dumbass so lets see what i can do
 
MachOne
PS: When do we start?

PSS: Any idea for our first topic?
Click to expand...

Sometime soon, when I know everyone has notified teams and rules.

The topics are surprises that will be sprung upon you.
 
Great filler text 👍

To keep things simple, we'll have just the 400 word arguement, then the judging based on that.

Edit: Any ideas how the rounds would go?

A vs. B
C vs. D
E vs. F

Would leave us with three teams in the final.
 
MachOne
So our first topic is a debate about the rules?

:odd:
Click to expand...

Hehe. No.

Each round will have a thread of it's own.

The first post in the thread will give the topic, and which team is for or against.
It will also give the deadline.
 
Danny, when you have 6 entries you then have a choice.

You either split them into 2 groups of three and the winner from each group goes to the final, or have 3 times in the final from 3 1v1s.

Personaly, I prefer the former, it's always better to have 2 opposing teams in the final than have 3 in the final.
 
ExigeExcel
Danny, when you have 6 entries you then have a choice.

You either split them into 2 teams of three and the winner from each group goes to teh final, or have 3 times in the final from 3 1v1s.

Personaly, I prefer the former, it's always better to have 2 opposing teams in the final than have 3 in the final.
Click to expand...

We already have 6 teams of three, that's the problem. It's not individual.
 
ultrabeat
Edit: Any ideas how the rounds would go?

A vs. B
C vs. D
E vs. F

Would leave us with three teams in the final.
Click to expand...

You could look for 3 more members to form a "Team G" (I'd be willing to give up my judge position and offer it to ExigeExcel to be on a team)

Or a round-robin tournament? Although this opens the possibility of a tie which could lead to further confusion and disputed winners.

Anyways, about the competition: Are there team leaders? It would be difficult to form a 400-word argument with three members offering their take on the particular topic.

I'm looking forward to reading and judging the arguments. 👍
 
ultrabeat
We already have 6 teams of three, that's the problem. It's not individual.
Click to expand...
I duon't know if this was before or after I edited but here's what I propose.

Group 1
Team A
Team B
Team C

Group 2
Team D
Team E
Team F

A -v- B
B -v- C
C -v- B

D -v- E
E -v- F
F -v- D

Winner of group 1 -v- Winner of group 2
 
That would preclude a Duke/danoff final.

Better to have

A vs. B
B vs. C
A vs. C

D vs. E
E vs. F
D vs. F

then

Winner Group 1 vs. Runner-up Group 2
Runner-up Group 1 vs. Winner Group 2

then

Winner Semi-Final 1 vs. Winner Semi-Final 2


This way, teams wouldn't get knocked out on the basis of losing a single match - all must lose 2 (except the losing finalist, who can lose 1 or 2) matches - and it provides the potential for any team to face any other team in the final.
 
I concur, a setup like that would probably work best.
 
Famine
That would preclude a Duke/danoff final.

Better to have

A vs. B
B vs. C
A vs. C

D vs. E
E vs. F
D vs. F

then

Winner Group 1 vs. Runner-up Group 2
Runner-up Group 1 vs. Winner Group 2

then

Winner Semi-Final 1 vs. Winner Semi-Final 2


This way, teams wouldn't get knocked out on the basis of losing a single match - all must lose 2 (except the losing finalist, who can lose 1 or 2) matches - and it provides the potential for any team to face any other team in the final.
Click to expand...
The repechage system :crazy: The hope of the unfortunate, the curse of the winner.
 
It might also be an idea to randomly select which teams go into which groups.
 
Yeah Duke, Famine and danoff's teams all in the same group is a bit much, besides I wouldn't want to be responsible for knocking one of them out in round 1 :p. Oh behave Dave, but seriousely the man from East of the Pennine watershed has a point.
 
Famine
That would preclude a Duke/danoff final.

Better to have

A vs. B
B vs. C
A vs. C

D vs. E
E vs. F
D vs. F

then

Winner Group 1 vs. Runner-up Group 2
Runner-up Group 1 vs. Winner Group 2

then

Winner Semi-Final 1 vs. Winner Semi-Final 2


This way, teams wouldn't get knocked out on the basis of losing a single match - all must lose 2 (except the losing finalist, who can lose 1 or 2) matches - and it provides the potential for any team to face any other team in the final.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a good plan to me.
 
ultrabeat
Great filler text 👍

To keep things simple, we'll have just the 400 word arguement, then the judging based on that.

Edit: Any ideas how the rounds would go?

A vs. B
C vs. D
E vs. F

Would leave us with three teams in the final.
Click to expand...
Danoff had a very good system for organizing the rounds. Look somewhere around the second page of this thread.

[edit] D'oh! Didn't read far enough ahead. I believe that Famine's system is similar if not identical.

If I can request, can we not start until at least Wednesday? It's going to be quite busy for me in the first haf of this week.
 
Probably all the more reason danoff and I shouldn't be on the same team!
 
I think the judges should conclude which teams are to be which, seeing as how they would be doing the judging. ;)

I see the original teams being a good matches as well as Famine's teams lineup.
 

Latest Posts

Back