Round 4: Judgement Tolkienologist vs OiE [Archive]

Beorn

07-14-2003, 06:16 AM

Well. I'm glad that was only 28 replies. :rolleyes:

(in this post, 'T' is Tolkienologists, and 'Oie' is Ost-in-Edhil...I'm that lazy...)

The Ts started off strong with a clearly laid out offense. However, there was one bit that was sketchy: The matter of selfishness. Arvedui replied, and -- although not stating it -- pointed out the selfishness part. The debate progressed, and it seemed that the Ts had the upper hand at the beginning. Ancalagon was the first to really point out that other people involved themselves. It was not until later that this was clearly agreed upon. But...moving on in the debate...not jumping forward: Eriol presented, again, a good argument, but I think he tried to address too much at once. Beleg did too, but when he mentioned Thingol's permission (7/6), he forgot to mention exactly at what point in time it would be opportune for B & L to run away. Chymaera came in with a strong set of quotes. However, there was one thing I noted (7/6) was that he said "sorry no other heads to count nobody else involved". Other people were involved, but of their own free will. Eriol picked this up and pointed this out. Had he brought it a bit further, he could have used it to his advantage. Jumping forward a bit now: Both sides realized that no one had been involved by B & L. People involved themselves. Oie adapted to this, where Ts did not. The Ts tried to stick to the question exactly. It was obvious the question had a flaw. Gate7ole wrapped and summed it up quite well.

At the beginning, it seemed to me that Oie had a harder task, and that Ts were arguing better. Near the middle and the end, both sides were balanced, but the Oie argued better. The key was that Oie adapted to the flaw in the question, and Ts did not.

So, I conclude that The Guild of Ost-In-Edhil won the debate that it was not, and would not have been ok for Beren and Luthien to involve others in their quest, for a seemingly selfish reason.

YayGollum

07-16-2003, 04:37 AM

Yikes! This was a hard debate to judge. Very fun to read, though. I really feel like voting for a draw, but I'll try to talk myself into one side or the other as I write this. :rolleyes: I loved the Ancalagon person's point, and wondered why the other people didn't seem to take it too seriously. But then, one of those three points that the other side had wasn't proved wrong very well. Hm. Okay, how's about I go with whichever side acted nicer to the other? No, that would be an evil thing for me to do, since I guess it's just a style note. :rolleyes: Argh! I don't want to go for a draw. Too bad people had different ideas about the way the topic was worded. Ack! Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people. It seemed to me to be that they tried harder and the other side kept repeating things and assuming that they were right. Didn't reinforce arguements enough for me. I wish I could remember people's names.

Aulë

07-20-2003, 07:08 AM

Could Beorn, Maedhros and the uknown Periaurian please post their judgement soon.
I want the Round completed ASAP.

Beleg

07-20-2003, 01:59 PM

Beorn has judged, Its Scatha who hasn't.

Maedhros

07-20-2003, 05:36 PM

That was an interesting debate, and I think that it is the first one in which the host has been called inept.:(
The topic was:
Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?
The topic was not:
Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to ask other people in their quest for a seemengly selfish reason?
involve: To engage as a participant; embroil.
ask: To make a request of.

The motif behind the question:
I had always felt that it was not ok for B&L to accept the help of others in their quest. After all, the purpose of their quest was a means for them to be together. It was something that would only benefit B&L, hence the seemengly selfish reason.
I think that Arverdui made a brilliant first post in the debate.
The rest of the people got involved with Beren and/or Lúthien because of their own free will, not that of Beren and Lúthien.
The Good people that Beren and Lúthien ivolved in their quest, received nothing but death and ruin as a reward for their effort. The bad guys benefited from it. Morgoth may have lost one of his Silmarils yes, but that didn't cause HIS downfall. No, Beren and Lúthien were only thinking about their own best. They had both Sauron and Morgoth at their mercy, yet the two most evil characters on Arda were allowed to live, to the ruin and grief of lots and lots of people. And don't tell me that this was preordained by Eru
Then I saw a shift in the stance of OiE regarding their side. IMO, they were arguing against Arverdui both Ancalagon and Chymaera.
I will not take into account what happened after the quest, the pre-ordained facet in the corpus of the works of JRRT is a topic in itself and not relevant to this debate.
Eriol made some good points in turning the arguments of OiE against them.
In the end, it was gate7ole with this:
The difference is that you suggest that Beren shouldn't (and didn't) ask for the help of anyone for the reasons you state. But this is not the question of the debate. The different people that were involved were never forced to act in favour of Beren and Lúthien. They were ¡°compelled to do so (e.g. because of oath ¨CFinrod, love ¨CHuan). B&L could not refuse their free aid. This is the difference from your statement. They accepted free aid and not asked for it. The first which is the case, is ok. Now if you believe that Beren should not even accept their aid, but continue completely of his own, I would like to hear how you will defend this reasoning.
Originally posted by Chymaera
The question assumes (wrongly) that Beren and Lúthien did involve other people and you by taking the side defending that it was okay to involve others.
The question assumes that Beren and Lúthien received help when accepting the involvement of others, the question never said that they had asked for help. I think that in the end, this proved to be the demise of OiE. If they just kept with Arverdui's line of reasoning, they would have won by a landslide.
My vote goes to the Tolkienologist.

Maedhros

07-20-2003, 05:38 PM

Aulë, would you be willing to be the fifth judge of this debate?

Ancalagon

07-20-2003, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by Maedhros
That was an interesting debate, and I think that it is the first one in which the host has been called inept.:(

Only by understanding the motivation, self-sacrifice and independence that encapsulates love itself can you realise this question is either incredibly inept or incredibly shrewd originally posted by Ancalagon
Don't be swayed by my choice of words Maedhros, they were constructed as such to make a point. However, knowing you as I do, I know you would certainly not let a misunderstanding of my choice of words impact upon your judgement, even though you obviously feel I had deliberately insulted you.

Maedhros

07-21-2003, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by Ancalagon
Don't be swayed by my choice of words Maedhros, they were constructed as such to make a point. However, knowing you as I do, I know you would certainly not let a misunderstanding of my choice of words impact upon your judgement, even though you obviously feel I had deliberately insulted you.
I think that my judgement was fair. And you used the shrewd part too, so it balanced things too.
I had made some general complaints about judging, and I have to try to be objective, which I hope I was. Personally, the side of OiE was the one that I agreed but I had to judge by what was posted in the debate and not my beliefs.

Aulë

07-21-2003, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Maedhros
Aulë, would you be willing to be the fifth judge of this debate?

OK
But I haven't read any of it yet, so my judgement may take a couple of days.

Scatha

07-22-2003, 03:33 PM

A strange event, this round between OiE and GoT.

Let's leave the language trivia aside and go the the heart of the matter. Though being put on the defensive at the beginning, GoT failed to follow up on their start, OiE came alongside with a very good post from chymaera. His posts from the Silmarillion came at a very good moment, thus shifted the debate in their favor.

Beren and Luthien did not ask for any help in their quest, Beren did not even want to take Luthien into Angband.

All these well chosen quotes from Tolkien's own work and in his own words, proved that the question could only be answered in one way.

Therefor, though my compliments go to all of the debators involved, my vote goes to OiE.

Aulë

07-23-2003, 05:02 PM

OK, since the outcome has already been achieved, I'll be brief.

For the first few posts, as the two Guilds started digging into the topic, it was fairly even, with the GoT's noses just in front. The GoT were successfully showing how B&L didn't invite anyone into their quest, and Anc threw in a post which I (at the time) though was rather strange, and foregoing ground to the GoT.

THEN, Anc said the quote that made all GoT's concepts into nothingness.
Was it ok for people to involve themselves in the quest of Beren and Lúthien? Yes!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien to involve other people in their quest if it were for selfish reasons? No!

Did Beren and Lúthien involve other people in their quest for selfish reasons? No!

Was it ok for Beren and Lúthien then to have people involved in their quest if it were for selfless reasons? Yes!

I guess it all seems pretty logical when one manipulates the question to suit their answers as you have clearly done in your opening arguement, which I have quoted above, even though it is not the actual question that has been asked!
BANG! It was brilliant. The topic had even fooled me until Anc pointed it out.

A bit of bickering then took place backwards and forwards, and GoT didn't really gain any ground through it, and didn't even acknowlege Anc's observation.
The thing that amazed me was that OiE didn't acknowlege it anymore either. Anc's teammates didn't pick it up, and ended up contradicting themselves a lot, allowing GoT to even it up once more.

As a team, GoT debated far better, their plan seemed simple, and it appeared that they communicated quite well.
Anc was by far the best debator with the best ideas, but his ideas were not supported by his teammates. They instead went down another path, which although was successful, wasn't as powerful as Anc's comments.

I give my vote to the Tolkienologists.

Beleg

07-23-2003, 05:48 PM

I thank all the judges and congragulate all the people who took part in this debate.

Just a query though,

Scatha Posts,

Beren and Luthien did not ask for any help in their quest, Beren did not even want to take Luthien into Angband.

All these well chosen quotes from Tolkien's own work and in his own words, proved that the question could only be answered in one way.

Err, that's allright, but wasn't the topic of the debate 'was it okay for B&L to ask other people for help in their Quest for seemingly selfish reason?'
As far as I can see this is different from whether they asked anyone or not.
Can you please elaborate a little on this point; It would be much appreciated.

Beleg

07-25-2003, 04:47 PM

The Guild of Tolkienology would like to lodge protest against the Judgement of two Judges, Scatha and YayGollum and would request The Tournament Organiser to take some action about the judgement.

Lhunithiliel

07-25-2003, 08:42 PM

I would like only to add:

We would like the judging of Yay to be clarified OR to be replaced by the judging of another judge.

This is not an objection against the team of OiE!
We think that there was a different approach to the topic by both teams AS WELL AS by the judges.

We respect both - the efforts of OiE during the debate to defend their way of interpretation and the efforts of the judges too.

However, Yay's vote we can neither understand nor accept as valid for the lack of any reasoning.

Therefore we demand this vote to be considered NOT VALID for the outcome of this debate.

YayGollum

07-26-2003, 12:38 AM

Yikes! What's so hard to understand? I voted for the ost-in-edhil types.

Here's where I explained it ---> Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people. It seemed to me to be that they tried harder and the other side kept repeating things and assuming that they were right. Didn't reinforce arguements enough for me. I wish I could remember people's names.

Maybe I should have taken the time to remember all of the names and point out all of the exact posts where someone repeated something too much or reinforced things enough or something like that? I don't see why it looks like there's no reasoning in that.

Lhunithiliel

07-26-2003, 07:50 AM

Yay, with all my respect ... but this is not a satisfactory explanation on your vote.

I will allow myself to remind your first post: (your second one I see is no much more different)

Yikes! This was a hard debate to judge. Very fun to read, though. I really feel like voting for a draw, but I'll try to talk myself into one side or the other as I write this. I loved the Ancalagon person's point, and wondered why the other people didn't seem to take it too seriously. But then, one of those three points that the other side had wasn't proved wrong very well. Hm. Okay, how's about I go with whichever side acted nicer to the other? No, that would be an evil thing for me to do, since I guess it's just a style note. Argh! I don't want to go for a draw. Too bad people had different ideas about the way the topic was worded. Ack! Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people. It seemed to me to be that they tried harder and the other side kept repeating things and assuming that they were right. Didn't reinforce arguements enough for me. I wish I could remember people's names.
You too had understood yourself that the two teams interpreted the question in two different ways! (see the highlighted section from the above quoted) But all of a sudden, you judge against one team for "repeating"themselves.:eek: :confused:
But it is obvious that we repeated our arguments on and on agaian and again in order to :

1/ maintain steady our position !!!!!!!

This I think no judge should consider as a flaw!!!! On the contrary!!!

2/ try make the other team understand the question of the debate the way we did.
We almost succeeded ! ;) :D

The most important thing in this whole affair is that the original and only true meaning of the question was explained by its creator - Maedhros and he voted for our Guild because we :

1/ had understood correctly the wording of the question
2/ we defended our position based on this correct understanding

We surely HAD to counter the other team's arguments, but at a very early point it became obvious that the two teams had a different approach to the question and this trend remained up until the end.

Referring the organization of the manner of debating.

I have to say that it is AGAIN obvious that our team had a better organization. Why.....We even posted a closing post!!!! Did OiE do the same? I'm afraid not.

All in all, this debate was very much confusing - the reasons have been more than once explained - and I and our Guild would not be satisfied completely with the outcome as now it is UNTILL thsi matter is discussed seriously, honestly and with the appropriate attention.

Aule, Mighty Vala, I guess you are the person to handle such things. :rolleyes:

Lhunithiliel

07-26-2003, 08:47 AM

Arvedui, I am surprised at what I am reading from you!!!:eek:

Are you telling me that we do not have the right to submit an objection?

Are we to blame that out of the 4 debates, we have been participating in, 2 were extremely problematic for our Guild and we were NOT to blame for those problems !!!!!!!?

I don't understand your statement that we influence the judges!:eek:
As I said, we have submitted an official objection AFTER the judging has been done. We have the right to do this and it is not a precedent in the Tournament!

So, I don't think you should attack our Guild in such a way!

We are not a herd of sheep to just follow the "road" without caring about whether it is the right or the wrong one!
We have the right to defend our interests!!!

Maedhros

07-26-2003, 04:19 PM

I'm saddened by these turns of events. And of course a great deal of responsability falls on me. When I tried to look for the topic for this debate, I was interested in a very specific aspect of the Quest of Beren and Lúthien. The fault is of course mine, the wording of the Topic could have been much better. The difference between asked and involved is a subtle one. I don't know what to say really, and to top it off, I was the hosts and I picked the judges. There is a constraint that the host has to oblige in the picking of them, is that a good or bad constraint, I don't know but it is fair. Would I have gotten other judges if that constraint didn't exist? Of course.

Lhunithiliel

07-26-2003, 06:32 PM

As Arvedui apologized to me personally and deleted his post to which my rather angry post was addressed, I wish to only say that we hope our objection is taken into consideration.

Unfortunately, from what I see, the score has been put into the score table and the Organizors obviously have not taken the trouble to handle the matter. :(

But.... we still have hopes this wiil happen.

Maedhros, and all friends from OiE, I wish our position to be crystal clear:

We do not BLAME!

We need justified and well explained votes "for" and "against".

Maedhros, please, do not feel guilty! :)
There is no reason for anyone of the debators or the judges to feel this way! As we have already explained, the topic was approached by the two teams differently and both teams did their best to defend their positions.

YayGollum

07-26-2003, 11:27 PM

Okay, I'll try to spell things out a little better this time.

You highlighted that first part. ---> Too bad people had different ideas about the way the topic was worded. Ack! Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people.

Would everything be perfect again if I just deleted that part and said that I must have been crazy when I wrote it? That first part doesn't explain why I voted the way I did, anyways. It was just me talking about being sad. People jumped on the topic in different ways, it seemed to me to be. Maybe I shouldn't have rambled so much. oh well.

As to the rest of the post ---> It seemed to me to be that they tried harder and the other side

That's a good reason to vote for somebody.

and the other side kept repeating things and assuming that they were right.

Sure, repeating things can be good, but in my opinion, it wasn't very good in this debate. The thing about reinforcing arguements ties in with that. This team didn't reinforce them enough for me. sorry about that. Obviously, some people have other opinions. Not my fault. Maybe I should have said all kinds of positive things about the other side?

I already asked if I should go back to find names of people so I could point out every single little word that made me judge things the way I did. You people didn't tell me that I should do that. How often are judges required to do that, anyways? Never, as far as I know. just trying to be nice.

Gil-Galad

07-27-2003, 04:22 AM

Again this tournament is becomming a mess(in our Guild's case).From 4 round we have participated so far only one was completed and judged without a scandal.
Sad but true:( .

Lhunithiliel

07-27-2003, 06:11 AM

Originally posted by YayGollum
Okay, I'll try to spell things out a little better this time.

You highlighted that first part. ---> Too bad people had different ideas about the way the topic was worded. Ack! Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people.

Would everything be perfect again if I just deleted that part and said that I must have been crazy when I wrote it?
I don't think so, Yay! :)
After all... this IS the problem!

As to the rest of the post ---> It seemed to me to be that they tried harder and the other side.
That's a good reason to vote for somebody.
Is it? :eek:
So, are you saying that our team was playing cards and in between, just for fun, we were posting some light-hearted arguments just with the good will for the debate to go on?

......and the other side kept repeating things and assuming that they were right.
Sure, repeating things can be good, but in my opinion, it wasn't very good in this debate. The thing about reinforcing arguements ties in with that. This team didn't reinforce them enough for me.
Yay, if by "reinforcing" you mean the pattern: one or two sentenses and then a quote and then again 1-2 sentenses and again a quote... Then... I'd say that you can't expect people to debate in one and the same way, following one and the same patterns.
Besides, we would very much like to understand which of our arguments were not well "reinforced"

I already asked if I should go back to find names of people so I could point out every single little word that made me judge things the way I did. You people didn't tell me that I should do that. How often are judges required to do that, anyways? Never, as far as I know. just trying to be nice. :rolleyes:
Ah! But, Yay, OF COURSE you are being nice! :D You have always been a nice person!

Sorry for "torturing" you! ;) :D

Yet... we are NOT satisfied!

Nóm

07-27-2003, 06:34 AM

So who has the final say here in this messy situation?

I think it should be the host.

I also have to say that there's always going to be people unhappy with judgements.

If a judge reads the debate and does his best to judge it for what it is, then he has done his job.

I know someone was very unhappy with one of my judgements in a debate from Round 1, and the biggest load of judgement **** I've ever seen was in GoO's Round 3 debate. I'm not kidding here, or exaggerating - it's a hoot. Go have a look!

I think people are too worried about winning. Afterall, a judgement is not really any indication of how good a team did, just how good that one person thinks they did. You can not change that.

Any judgement that is the result of a debate between a judge and a team should be void - in my opinion.

Judgements are not without flaws. They are no real indication of anything other than what 5 people think of the debate.

Nothing will change that the results of a judgement are not always in favour of the best team.

If people do their best to judge, what more can be asked of them?

Ideally, the judgement would be a better indicator of which team did best, if it had only one judge such as Maedhros... but even then nothing is perfect.

Some judgements are plain bad. There is no way around this.

That is one reason that winning officially is not important. It doesn't necessarily mean the winning team is best. Or that the losing team was not best.

And even I can say that Maedhros is most excellent judge, or that Gothmog is an excellent judge, but someone else may disagree with me on that.

But I think that all judges should be under the watch of the host. The Host's job to pick people who he thinks are good enough judges, and to step in if a judgement is bad. If team compalins to a host, I think he should have the say in what to do with that complaint.

If the host says, for example, that the judgement will stand, then I think it should.

Otherwise the contesting of a judgement can potentially go on and on forever.

Eriol

07-27-2003, 06:45 AM

Er... if I may intrude...

I don't think this "ongoing chat" is really useful for anyone; an official protest has been made, and we must wait for Aulë's dealing of the matter. Don't get me wrong, I think Yay and Scatha must be given every opportunity to defend their judging statements; but I think it must be made in a more ordered fashion, in which we explain the reasons for our protest, and they answer it, and some neutral person (or persons) judges the merit of the question.

We are not attacking the judges; we are protesting the judgments. Our quarrel is with the statements. As I see it, we could never protest "bad judgment" in itself; it is a risk that we run in any tournament of this kind. And this means that we do not think that either of the protested judgments is "bad" -- we think they are self-contradictory, something which is not a matter of subjective opinion, and which may be decided by arbitration. We think that the opinion stated by the judges disagrees with their vote.

A protest against a judgment can be either because the judgment is badly worded or self-contradictory. In the first case, a clarification is in order; in the second case, if proven, it is quite clear that the judgment must be replaced.

For example, BlackCaptain's judgment in the debate between Scholars and Elves posted a self-contradictory judgment, since he was mistaken about the job of a judge; he said that "both teams were equal but I'll give the vote to team A because team B chose the side of the topic with which I disagree". In other words, he thought that the choosing of the side was open to his judgment, and used it as a tie-breaker. After it was explained to him that the choice of sides is not liable to be judged, he changed his vote for a draw (since he thought both sides were equal; that was the self-contradiction, between his opinion and his vote).

In the present situation, there are self-contradictory statements in both Yay and Scatha's judgments (in my opinion). We should take a look at them, to see if it is the result of bad wording; if so, mere clarification is needed. But if it is a true contradiction, then it must be solved one way or the other. For it means that, for instance, Yay voted for O-i-E even though his opinion amounts to a draw; and that Scatha voted for O-i-E even though his opinion amounts to saying that the Tolkienologists won. Either they must change their opinions, or their votes.

That is a question that can be solved by impartial arbitration, I think; and this is why I think we must discuss it only after Aulë settles on a method for that. Back and forth here on this thread won't help.

P.S. I just read Nóm's post, and I agree completely with her (even about the Round 3 judgment she alluded to; I had looked at it before). I agree with her about the "winning is not all there is to the tournament" stance; and I agree that giving final arbitration to the Host is both fair and reasonable. The Host can open a thread to hear the arguments from both sides and decide whether there was a contradiction or not.

Now we have to see what Aulë thinks.

EDIT: I know nobody asked me; but I will add what I wrote in another thread, about how a judge should deal with the problem of an ambiguous question. Needless to say, what follows is my opinion only.

When we see this happening (the two guilds defending different and unrelated statements -- so unrelated that the GoT agreed with O-i-E! and it had to agree, since O-i-E's statement was one of the GoT's own arguments to defend their statement) I think that the judges have two options:

1) They decide that the question is flawed, so flawed that the misunderstanding is not the blame of the guilds; then he MUST vote for a draw. It's the only fair action, for no debate is actually happening.

2) They decide that the question is NOT flawed, that the wording, even if ambiguous, is acceptable; then they must look at the debate and decide which team is doing the better job of defending their own interpretation of the question as the correct interpretation. What they must NOT do is pick one of the interpretations as "correct" with no reason for it and vote accordingly.

Aulë

07-27-2003, 07:43 AM

Whilst I ponder the mess that you lot have made ( ;) ), I would like to make a suggestion:

Many people who are participating in this Tournament have not judged before, and do not know the proper procedures that are required in determining a victor in a debate. That is why I am suggesting that a group of senior debators type up a tutorial of sorts to assist judges in their decision. Hints and tips of what to look for in a debate, and what not to do (and to therefore come up with a legitimate result).
This tutorial would not have to be followed by the judges, but it would probably be most appreciated by the junior judges in this Tournament, and would hopefully prevent messes like this from happening again.

Since the GoT and GoO seem to be complaining the most about previous judgements, I would ask that senior members of both Guilds (and of OiE, GoP, GoE/D and GoS) contribute towards this.

Nóm

07-27-2003, 07:55 AM

Since the GoT and GoO seem to be complaining the most about previous judgements...
It's just me as far as GoO goes Aule, and I wasn't complaining so much as using it as an example. I think it is too late to do anything about it now. I really care so little about winning that I'd not even bother with it. One thing I will never do though, is ask that person to judge.

Eriol

07-27-2003, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by Aulë
Whilst I ponder the mess that you lot have made ( ;) ), I would like to make a suggestion:

Many people who are participating in this Tournament have not judged before, and do not know the proper procedures that are required in determining a victor in a debate. That is why I am suggesting that a group of senior debators type up a tutorial of sorts to assist judges in their decision. Hints and tips of what to look for in a debate, and what not to do (and to therefore come up with a legitimate result).
This tutorial would not have to be followed by the judges, but it would probably be most appreciated by the junior judges in this Tournament, and would hopefully prevent messes like this from happening again.

Since the GoT and GoO seem to be complaining the most about previous judgements, I would ask that senior members of both Guilds (and of OiE, GoP, GoE/D and GoS) contribute towards this.

Ponder on, mighty Vala...

:D

This idea of yours is the "guidelines for judging" that was discussed in the rules draft thread after Maedhros pinpointed the problem; it seems like a good idea, and yet it never got off the ground. I don't think I can do what I did with the rules (write a draft and see where it will lead us), because I never judged a debate; I really think this should come from more experienced judges, i.e., anybody :). If a draft is needed to get it started, though, I can write something; just let me know.

Ancalagon

07-27-2003, 07:10 PM

Hmm, it seems you 'Tolkien...whatevers you think you ares' have managed to rustle up a bit of a storm. I for one now feel that Ost-in-Edhil have had the rug pulled from under their feet because either no-one among you believes our position in the debate was of value or the fact that whatever way we answered the question it was wrong anyway. Either way, in your eyes Ost-in-Edhil put up a poor enough arguement that judges should rethink their judgement and vote for you. Personally, I find it extremely distasteful that whatever you say about it not being about us, you have undermined any efforts we have made in the debate.

Arvedui might pull his post, but I sure as hell won't pull this.

Eriol

07-27-2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Ancalagon
Hmm, it seems you 'Tolkien...whatevers you think you ares' have managed to rustle up a bit of a storm. I for one now feel that Ost-in-Edhil have had the rug pulled from under their feet because either no-one among you believes our position in the debate was of value or the fact that whatever way we answered the question it was wrong anyway. Either way, in your eyes Ost-in-Edhil put up a poor enough arguement that judges should rethink their judgement and vote for you. Personally, I find it extremely distasteful that whatever you say about it not being about us, you have undermined any efforts we have made in the debate.

Arvedui might pull his post, but I sure as hell won't pull this.

I'm speaking for myself only.

I have not seen Arvedui's post; but whatever you say, Ancalagon, I'll still believe what I said earlier -- O-i-E debated fairly, and well, and are not to be criticized in any way. Now, if from these words, you infer that (a) I don't think that your position was of value; or (b) that any way you answered the question, it was wrong; or (c) that we have undermined the efforts you made in this debate; this is your right. I can't do anything about how you perceive our actions.

I hope my words were not ambiguous.

And if you are comfortable with this judgment, I only wish you have the luck to not see this "rug-pulling" being done to you; for I am feeling as if the rug was pulled from under my feet. Beorn says that the question is flawed, but he votes for O-i-E; how come? Yay says both teams were equal, but he votes for O-i-E; how come? Scatha says Beren and Lúthien did not involve anyone, and votes for O-i-E; how come?

I think Aulë's was a better vote for O-i-E than any of these; yet he votes for the Tolkienologists. How come?

Now, if we are all comfortable with these judgments, that is fine and dandy; it just goes to show that the scoring table is meaningless, that the judging is meaningless, and that we are here simply to debate. I like that conclusion; it was my goal in the first place, in this Tournament. But we might as well make it explicit.

Lhunithiliel

07-27-2003, 09:38 PM

Anc, I do not understand your anger!:eek:

And having in mind all that has been going on so far in this Tournament I think its fun and its purpose are
D E A D!

What is achieverd?

Knowledge? - NOT TOO MUCH !
Fair rivalry? - NOT IN MOST CASES!
Exchange of valuable ideas? - BARELY SO!

All that this activity has UNFORTUNATELY achieved is to make former friends quarrel !!!!! :( Good relationships - being spoiled!!! :( Angry words being thrown and nerves broken... :( People feeling they have wasted time and efforts in vain! :(

S A D !!!!

WHAT, I PRAY, FOR ?????????

Scores !

Oh, yes! And perhaps for the opportunity of one guild or another to say : "See? We are the best!"

Oh! How worthy !!!!!!!

Nóm

07-27-2003, 10:01 PM

I have to say that I don't think the tournament has caused anything like that for any of the members of GoO, Lhun.

Anyhow I think GoT are dying to win, and its that simple. I mean otherwise, what sense is there is trying to get a judge to give a different judgement?

You can not change what someone thought of the debate.

It is absurd.

Even if a judge becomes aware of an error in the judgement he offered, what then? He just comes back and changes his judgement, and then as soon as he notices another flaw in his judgement, comes back and changes it again and then again and so on? And then both teams start pointing things out to every judge that comes through here?

Unless the host thinks that a judgement was literally crud... to the point it looks like the person didn't read the debate or didn't even try to judge, then why shouldn't a judgement stand? Are they not nothing more than what 5 people think of the debate?

Scores !

Oh, yes! And perhaps for the opportunity of one guild or another to say : "See? We are the best!"

Oh! How worthy !!!!!!!

That is not how everyone sees it.

And from my observations GoT has been the guild most concerned with that.

Granted, I hoped that GoO would come out of this with a few wins... at least a couple, but I really don't see how it is worth trying to change a judges mind over.

YayGollum

07-27-2003, 10:26 PM

Lhunithiliel person, you say that this part of my judgement thing was the problem ---> Too bad people had different ideas about the way the topic was worded. Ack! Okay, fine, I'll go with the ost-in-edhil people.

Is it not possible for people to spell things out for me? Or was the way that I spelled things out just too confusing? Or do you think I was lying? I wasn't. Even if you people happen to think that I don't know what I'm talking about, I do. sorry about that. oh well. I don't see what's so bad about that quote up there. Explain it. The quote has nothing to do with my reasons for voting the way I did.

No, I wasn't saying that your team was playing cards and in between, just for fun, you were posting some light-hearted arguments just with the good will for the debate to go on. If I wanted to say that, it would have been a little more obvious. I don't know how you came up with that. Do you think that everything I wrote was some evil and veiled insult? It wasn't. I was just tossing my opinion. I wrote that it seemed to me to be that one side tried harder. Everyone's judgement is what it seems to them to be. Not my fault.

Also, I never said that I expect everyone to debate the same way. Why do you assume things? I just noticed that you people made points and just kept repeating them. A little reinforcement would have made them look better. The other team had good arguements and defended better and things like that. It's not fun to have to defend my own observances. I shall know better for the next time. Shall make gigantic judgements that pick every little post apart. I'm sure that you'll love it.

Lhunithiliel

07-27-2003, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by Nóm
I have to say that I don't think the tournament has caused anything like that for any of the members of GoO, Lhun.

Anyhow I think GoT are dying to win, and its that simple. I mean otherwise, what sense is there is trying to get a judge to give a different judgement?

You can not change what someone thought of the debate.

It is absurd.

Even if a judge becomes aware of an error in the judgement he offered, what then? He just comes back and changes his judgement, and then as soon as he notices another flaw in his judgement, comes back and changes it again and then again and so on? And then both teams start pointing things out to every judge that comes through here?

Unless the host thinks that a judgement was literally crud... to the point it looks like the person didn't read the debate or didn't even try to judge, then why shouldn't a judgement stand? Are they not nothing more than what 5 people think of the debate?

That is not how everyone sees it.

And from my observations GoT has been the guild most concerned with that.

Granted, I hoped that GoO would come out of this with a few wins... at least a couple, but I really don't see how it is worth trying to change a judges mind over.
Nom, this is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read!

I don't think you have got the slightest idea of what our Guild wants!
Therefore, your "conclusions" are.... Well, at least they made me smile. :D

Yay, I do not think you were lying!!!!!!

Jesus! Am I speaking in English? :eek:

Does anybody read our posts?

YayGollum

07-27-2003, 10:51 PM

I have. Looks like you just insulted this Confusticated lady. oh well. sorry about that. I asked you some questions. Ack! Now it looks like you're not reading my post that's trying to explain things. Trying to resolve things. Craziness. Looks like I haven't explained myself enough. Tell me what the problem is now. I thought I spelled things out. just tell me what else I gots to do. Not trying to prolong this.

Lhunithiliel

07-27-2003, 10:55 PM

Oh, well.... :D :D :D

All right, Yay!

Now you have spoken! :D

Thank you!
******
And if we are to pay attention to the so very much important scores... Well I still hold my opinion, that both guilds did equally well in this debate.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 12:44 PM

OK, after going through this thread (And the OiE and GoT discussion threads), and speaking with FoolOfATook, I have come up with this:

The following two rules have possibly been broken.
5. DUTIES OF THE JUDGES
a) Each judge shall examine the debate thoroughly once it is over, and post a considered opinion in support of his vote;

8. RULES OF CONDUCT IN THE DEBATE
c) No posts in the judging thread shall be made in an attempt to influence the judges, either by the debating members or by other members of any Guild;

As rule 9 states,
9. PENALTIES IN THE DEBATE
b) The Host of the Debate is the person in charge of dealing out penalties – no penalty shall be given without his assent;
c) The first penalty for any Guild after a Rule breach must, in all cases, consist of a Warning, with no further effects;
d) The third penalty, and subsequent penalties for any Guild after the same Rule has been breached three times must, in all cases, consist of the loss of 1 point in the overall standings;
e) The second penalty for any Guild after the same Rule has been breached two times is left at the discretion of the Host – either Warning or Loss of a point in the overall standings.
The host (Maedhros) shall decide whether Rule 5a. and 8c. have being breached, and if nessesary, any punishments.

Now, to prevent this from happening again, I shall introduce the following rule:
A judge's vote is final. No appeal can be made against it from the participating Guilds. If the judgement does not adhere to Rule 5a, the host shall follow the guidelines given in Rule 9.
In extreme cases, a replacement judge may be selected by the host (Only after consultation with the Tournament Organizer(s) and/or the Appeals Committee).

Rule 2b. states,
b) The Host will select 4 judges among the other neutral Guilds, and 1 Neutral (Guild-less) Judges;
I strongly suggest the host put considerable thought into their selection of judges. Viewing previous judgements is a good way of deciding which members are skilled enough to act out their duties.

Less experienced judges should seek advice from the Judging Tutorial, which shall be formed by the senior debators of this forum.

Therefore:
The current score shall remain as it is now.
There shall be no more debate on the judgements handed out by the 5 judges.
Maedhros (as host) shall determine whether any penalty shall be given.

Scatha

07-28-2003, 02:13 PM

Let me see if I get this straight, Aule?

In case rule 5a has not been met, I do believe that the guilds involved can apply to the host then for clarification?

As for rule 8c, how can anyone influence a judge, if all five votes have been given? That was exactly what GoT waited for, before they made their post. Asking for a clarification of the reasoning of the votes is permissable, isn't it?

Aulë

07-28-2003, 03:00 PM

In case rule 5a has not been met, I do believe that the guilds involved can apply to the host then for clarification?

Nope.
They will have to accept the decision.
The host is the only one who can do that.

As for rule 8c, how can anyone influence a judge, if all five votes have been given? That was exactly what GoT waited for, before they made their post. Asking for a clarification of the reasoning of the votes is permissable, isn't it?

It appeared that they weren't going to give up until YayG or you changed your vote.
But that is for Maedhros to decide. Not you or me.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by Aulë
It appeared that they weren't going to give up until YayG or you changed your vote.

It appears that you are making an unwarranted statement there, Aulë. Do not try to read our minds or purposes, it's hardly profitable.

The point is no one knew how to act in this situation -- neither the teams, nor the judges, nor the Host. We know now.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by Eriol
It appears that you are making an unwarranted statement there, Aulë. Do not try to read our minds or purposes, it's hardly profitable.

I am entitled to my own opinions. Be them warranted or not.:rolleyes:

Eriol

07-28-2003, 04:04 PM

Well then, here is one opinion -- you are trying to influence Maedhros. I think you have just opened your Guild up for a penalty.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 04:09 PM

Let me remind you that I am in charge here- not you.
I am just trying to fix up the mess that you and your fellow Guildmembers have made.
To do this, I have to show Maedhros what to do, and the reasons why they have to be done.

Childish remarks such as the one you posted above do not help in the matter, though.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 04:14 PM

Childish? I thought I was entitled to my own opinions, warranted or not. Or is only the Tournament Organizer who can have his opinions?

I am being deadly serious. You can call it childish if you want; but then you open yourself to another charge, that of disrespect against a fellow member of the Tournament.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 04:20 PM

Don't tempt me Eriol...
:rolleyes:
I would have expected the members of the GoT to act a bit more mature than the way you are acting.

I really hope (For the GoT's sake) that you reconsider your childish accusations, and delete the offending posts.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 04:30 PM

I would do the same to you. After all, this is the second time that you disrespect my serious accusation. Let me remind you that after the third offense the penalty is automatic.

I would have expected the Tournament Organizer to be more impartial and to refrain from posting unwarranted opinions.

I'll tell you what -- you take away that offending sentence and the subsequent posts and I'll do the same. It could not be fairer.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 04:39 PM

I am sorry to announce that I am issuing the Guild of Tolkienology with One Warning Point.

Don't tempt me anymore, Eriol. I don't want your team losing points over this.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 04:44 PM

I am sorry to announce that our dear Tournament Organizer has just overextended his own power. He has not any authority to deal warning points.

I don't think there is any rule about abuse of power from the TO; but I think this should be foreseen for the next tournaments. Just as the judging can be improved for the next tournament, it seems that the organization can as well.

And now I am sorry to announce that I will not take away any of the accusations I have made so far, i.e., I will retract my generous offer in my last post. I will list the accusations here for easy reference:

1) trying to influence the host with an unwarranted opinion
2) disrespecting a member of the tournament
3) disrespecting a member of the tournament for the second time
4) abusing his power.

I make these accusations with the utmost respect for Aulë; but rules are rules.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 04:50 PM

Your Rule-list extends to "in-debate" matters.
The Tournament Organizer controls all "out of debate matters".

As I see it, through you, the GoT has warranted a Warning point.
One more accusation from you, and I'm banning you from the Tournament for a month.

This is in your hands Eriol.
I don't want to do this, but for the sake of the Tournament, I will if required.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 04:55 PM

And this statement of yours about "in-debate" and "out-debate" is specified in which rule?

Sorry, Aulë, I am warning you now: this is in your hands. I have done nothing wrong here. If you think you can ban a person from the Tournament on a whim, you are sorely mistaken.

As I said earlier, abuse of power is not foreseen in the rules; it's a pity.

My accusations stand. I hope you will not breach any more rules in the future; GoP can gain a lot of warning points through your stance in this thread.

Aulë

07-28-2003, 04:58 PM

I'm sorry to announce that:

Eriol (Of the GoT) has been banned from participating in the 2003 TTF Debate Tournament until the 28th of August 2003

All posts by him in the Tournament forum shall be ignored by all Tournament players and officials. If he continues to persist with his accusations, the TTF Moderator Group shall be called upon.

Eriol

07-28-2003, 05:03 PM

Very well, then my post will be ignored now :D

I'd like to know the accusations. I'd like to know what rule I did breach.

I've shown which rules the TO has breached.

Maedhros

07-28-2003, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by Aulë
To do this, I have to show Maedhros what to do, and the reasons why they have to be done.
Thanks, but I will rely on my own judgement and the rules that were drafted.

This is one of the things that have saddened me in the Tournament. I believe in the honorability of the debates. I believe that the most important thing is the participation of the members and the knowledge that you gain from it. It is a celebration of Tolkien first and foremost. Winning or loosing is secondary.
The judging is far from perfect. There are some restrictions in the selection of the judges. And yes, some of the opinions of the judges are off the mark and some doesn't even make sense. But that is their unbiased opinion, and that is why it is fair. I have won debates and I have lost some, but in all the cases I did my best and regardless of the outcome I won because I learned things that I didn't know.

Regarding the judgement of this debate:
I'm okay with the judging of YayGollum. I personally find the judgement of Scatha weird, but that is his decision and that is fair.
Now, it has come to my attention that Scatha is a member now of the Guild of Tolk, if he was a member of that Guild when this debate started, I would disregard his judgment and seek for another judge.

If the Guild of P and the Guild of T fiasco last time didn't merit any warning points, I will not issue points here.

From the Rules of the Tournament

9b. b) The Host of the Debate is the person in charge of dealing out penalties – no penalty shall be given without his assent;

Originally posted by Aulë
I am sorry to announce that I am issuing the Guild of Tolkienology with One Warning Point.
Eriol (Of the GoT) has been banned from participating in the 2003 TTF Debate Tournament until the 28th of August 2003

Since I'm the host of the debate, I'm against both of these decisions. In my view, it is not fair. Since rule 9b states that the host is the only one who can issue a penalty, it seems that they are void.

To Aulë and Eriol, stop this bickering now. This is against the spirit of the Tournament.

YayGollum

07-28-2003, 11:43 PM

Thanks, Maedhros and Lhunithiliel people. sorry about my part in any of this trouble here. *hides* oh well. Have fun.

Beorn

07-29-2003, 05:31 AM

Aulë, although the tournament organizer, you are not the host of this debate, and you must follow the rules that you choose to enforce. Considering that in conjunction with rule 9b, the one warning point should be considered invalid and null, and the "banning" of Eriol should be considered invalid and null.

To "punish" (quotes used to show the looseness with which I use the word) anyone, you must state why. You did not, aside from the fact that you do not have the authority to (9b). However, when Eriol validly made an accusation against you, stating clearly what it was that he felt you broke, you replied by

While the first accusation of Eriol's is a bit weak, the second, third, and fourth are not.

Either everyone, regardless of their position, will play by the rules which they agreed to, or they will not play at all, which can be arranged very easily.

EDIT: The rest of this post is much more fitting for a PM....

Lhunithiliel

07-29-2003, 06:44 AM

I thank Maedhros and Beorn as a representative of the True Authority of TTF, for their rightful intervention !
I consider this discussion closed.

On behalf of the Guild of Tolkienology, I am satisfied with the outcome of the "Eriol case"!

As for the outcome of this particular debate I think that its case should be an example to all of us to not let such things happen again.
And they probably will not, if the rules of the Tournament are strictly followed and observed and if the people who accept the hard task to judge debates approach their duties with the appropriate attitude.

I only very much hope that this quarrel has made us all see that if we want to keep TTF-community steady, people should never forget that all we are guests here and we should observe the rules of the "house"! One of this is to be tolerant to the rest of the members of the community and not to ascribe super powers to his own persona.

Scatha

07-29-2003, 04:53 PM

Regarding the judgement of this debate:
I'm okay with the judging of YayGollum. I personally find the judgement of Scatha weird, but that is his decision and that is fair.
Now, it has come to my attention that Scatha is a member now of the Guild of Tolk, if he was a member of that Guild when this debate started, I would disregard his judgment and seek for another judge.

Excuse me?? :mad:

So now we are going to keep a secondary list of who is in which guild, in addition to the one he debates for?? :confused:

This has NEVER kept me from providing an impartial vote.
I have judged several other debates, while I was on the membershiplist of both these guilds, which never was an issue.
I joined the GoT somewhere in the beginning stages of the tournament, unknowing that there would be an issue made out of it. :(

I resent the fact that you imply that someone who is part of two guilds cannot judge a debate impartially, in the name of the guild he debates for. This, for your info, has not been the first time this has happened and probably not the last either.

So that would mean that Beth cannot judge it either, as she too is part of both guilds. That leaves one member of our team from GoE to judge and probably host, as this will probably be considered the same thing.

Once this is issued as a rule, you'll have no hosts and judges left, beside those that are part of just one guild, as most are part of multiple. :rolleyes: Heck, the tournament leader is part of most guilds on the board.

Shall we cease the entire tournament here and now then?