'debatepoint.com is superior to truthmapping.com'
[ support:42% : certainty:84 ] · [29 replies] ·
[0 comment]
-
Debatepoint is not only open-source, but also open-content. Its source-code is open to the public for review, and its content is open for redistribution via the GFDL (like wikipedia). If you wanted to make a complete and exact clone of debatepoint, you can. Not only is truthmapping.com not open-source nor open-content, at the bottom of its about page states "The TruthMapping method is patent pending."
-
support 100% · complicatedby metric on 2006-10-11 09:25:55Truthmapping.com creates a barrier to entry by being complicated. Why should it be more complicated than support/opppose/comment. Truthmapping hides the opposing arguments and calls them, euphamistically, "critiques". Why hide what they really are? Debatepoint relies on user moderation to weed out any insulting opposition replies.
-
(comment) 100% · Re: complicatedby metric on 2006-10-11 09:28:24Euphemistically, rather. Remind me to add spell-checking... :P
-
-
support 100% · Consolidationby metric on 2006-10-11 09:36:26I don't see on truthmapping.com any form of real consolidation on arguments. All I see is the number of supporting replies. Debatepoint uses a tree of support and oppose replies to accumulate a consensus on the original point. Again, why hide opposing arguments? They are key to the scientific method. (The notion of falsifiability)
-
While not currently active yet, debatepoint supports stances for points on every user. eg. If there is a point called "Abortion should be legal", then there is also a stance such as "George W. Bush's stance on 'Abortion should be legal'". This should hopefully be helpful in the future for "sideline" formal debates. All points are currently the "consensus" user's stance.
-
support 100% · Column Viewby yqbd on 2007-12-18 07:19:23I found this point and debatepoint.org by searching for truthmapping.com. I wasn't really hooked to debatepoint until I found column view. It should be the default view.
-
(comment) 100% · Re: Column Viewby metric on 2008-01-11 02:40:57I started out with 'column view' as the default, but later switched to threaded view for various reasons. The biggest reason was because I was noticing a pattern where moderators would have predefined opinions on the main point, and would use column view to easily moderate every argument on one side. Threaded view encourages moderators to read arguments on both sides of the debate. Another big reason for threaded view is to reduce the number of page reloads.
If you still think column view should be the default, start a new point along the lines of "Column-view should be the default".. Post some supportive arguments as to why you think it should be so.
-
-
oppose 80% · apples and orangesby anonymous on 2007-01-12 06:10:04How can one be superior when they are really apples and oranges? From their [[web video|http://truthmapping.com/ab out.php] I see that truthmapping allows a user to support their position in detail whereas in debatepoint they simply make a single statement without support.
-
oppose 80% · Re: apples and orangesby metric on 2007-01-20 17:04:17There's nothing stopping the submitter in contributing to the arguments as for or against the point they submit. The idea is to simplify arguments by targeting "points". If the point is too broad or irrelevant, there is direct point moderation coming in the future.
-
oppose 80% · Re: apples and orangesby anonymous on 2007-01-22 05:31:47But as we are demonstrating here, a back and forth "debate" takes us away from the topic. We can easily digress with this technique.
-
oppose 100% · Re: apples and orangesby metric on 2007-01-22 06:20:29And I can easily moderate your comment as 'irrelevant', though I don't because I want it to be seen and I think it's relevant to the topic. BTW, if you log in, your comments will be automatically moderated to 100% when you submit them. As it is I have to moderate you as 'support' just to keep your comments from being buried under the debate.
-
-
-
oppose 100% · Re: curiousby metric on 2007-01-22 06:32:52whoa.. comments aren't supposed to have an effect on the moderation system.. I'll look into it.
-
(comment) 0% · Re: curiousby laptop on 2007-01-31 21:09:47testing
-
(comment) 100% · Re: curiousby anonymous on 2007-01-31 21:35:46test2
-
-
-
-
oppose 80% · tree vs. inward lookingby anonymous on 2007-01-12 06:13:29Truthmapping removes digression by having the topic be the context that you cannot leave. Debatepoint creates trees that allows digression. Apples and oranges.
-
oppose 80% · Re: tree vs. inward lookingby metric on 2007-01-20 17:14:09Debatepoint does not promote digression. If you create a user you can moderate any argument as "irrelevant", hence keeping the debate on topic.
-
oppose 80% · Re: tree vs. inward lookingby anonymous on 2007-01-22 05:33:10Who exactly does the moderating? The creator of the topic? That's too much power in the hands of one side.
-
oppose 100% · Re: tree vs. inward lookingby metric on 2007-01-22 06:22:07no. Anyone logged in as a user can moderate.
-
-
-
-
oppose 80% · show argument firstby anonymous on 2007-01-12 06:15:46Truthmapping initially hides the critiques which allows us to examine the argument without input that can sway our judgement. Then if you wish to view the critiques you can view them. Apples and oranges.
-
oppose 80% · Re: show argument firstby metric on 2007-01-20 17:10:33Falsifiability is paramount to the scientific method. Swaying judgment without it, IMO, is biased towards every positive argument. This is not apples and oranges if you consider that both sites are attempting uncover "truth". With that in mind its more like apples vs. rotten apples.
-
oppose 80% · Re: show argument firstby anonymous on 2007-01-22 05:34:53Both methods allow users to critique so your opposition is without foundation.
-
oppose 100% · Re: show argument firstby metric on 2007-01-22 06:26:32true, but truthmapping.com, by default, hides the opposing arguments. Here in this debate, almost all arguments are opposing! Opposition is a fundamental foundation of any debate.
-
-
-
-
oppose -100% · apples and orangesby anonymous on 2007-01-12 06:11:31How can one be superior when they are really apples and oranges? From their [[web video|http://truthmapping.com/ab out.php] I see that truthmapping allows a user to support their position in detail whereas in debatepoint they simply make a single statement without support.
-
oppose -100% · Superior?by anonymous on 2007-01-12 06:16:17How can an apple be superior to an orange?
Powered by Debatepoint.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.