The DDO leader board does not accurately list the top debaters

Instead of CON giving specific examples of my semantic arguments, justifying his claim, He uses the first and last sentences stating that I argue using semantics. This is an unfounded ad hominem attack used to support opposition against me. It is also hypocritical considering CON's main contention is that my definition of ‘top debater is vague'. Rebuttals: 1) Weak definition "I gave a perfectly valid argument of why the definition is weak. " Nobody cares how many wins one has or what one's win ratio is. People want to know which debaters are 'better' than the other. I have clearly defined why the leader board does not determine which debater is better than the other. If debater A is ranked higher than debater B, then debater A is more likely to win a debate the debater, assuming it is a fair debate topic. The leader board does not do this. RoyLatham has defeated theLwerd in all debates he had with her. RoyLatham has also defeated brian_eggleston multiple times in debates. However, RoyLatham is ranked lower than both of them. [1][2][3] CON states that people on the leader board have a high probability of winning AND compete against others who are also good. On the first page of the percentile category of the leader board, there are 6 debaters who have lost over 30% of their debates, 3 debaters that have lost over 40% of their debates, and 1 debater that has lost more than half of his debates. Clearly not all the debaters on the first page of the leader board are the best. [1] If one were to look at the win ratio category of the leader board, there are debaters on the first page who have only won one debate. I won my first debate. The debater forfeited. My win ratio is now only 60%. This category of the leader board does not show the best debaters either. Contentions: 1. Discrimination against those who discovered the website later. CON stated that the leader board 'does not discriminate against newer members'. His words state otherwise. He justifies this discrimination stating that older members have 'struggled' to get where they are by participating in debates. The same is true with new members. There are new members who debate well. For examples, Sieben who has been here for only 1 month has won almost all his debates against good debaters[4]. New good members probably spent years debating, learning about complex issues, and developing good researching, reading, writing, and reasoning skills yet did not discover this website until later. Just because these members did not discover the website sooner does not mean these members have not struggled. Also, CON does not answer the main problem. Those that were the first to discover the website will always have an advantage against those who have discovered it later. Even if those who discovered the website later win at a ratio as fast as those who discovered it earlier, those who discovered it earlier will always be ahead. Even if members who just recently discovered the website stay for years, these members will never be able to make it onto the DDO leader board. How is that fair? 2) Factoring in win ratio While I will accept the mistake that I did not realize that the leader board had a win ratio category, that does not negate my argument. CON does not negate the inaccuracies with the win ratio board. That is the resolution we are discussion, that the leader board on DDO does not inaccurately list top debaters. I have stated many inaccuracies with the leader board, win ratio is just one. However, having a category that separates this factor does not accurately list the top debaters on the DDO leader board. There are multiple variables one must consider to determine the best debater. Factoring one variable alone does little. For example, force is determined by two variables, mass and acceleration. However, mass or acceleration alone does not determine force but a combination of both variables. 3) Factoring in who one is debating I did not state that only good debaters should face bad debaters. I stated that winning against a good debater should be factored into consideration compared to against a bad debater. Not only did I state this, but I also came up with a rough algorithm to do this. It is show below: [1+sum(wins*(‘percentile of opponent'/100))] / [1+sum(loses*(1-‘percentile of opponent'/100))] Rank in order from highest to lowest number based on equation above. [[# of people-Rank]/[total amount of people]*100 = percentile. Start with everyone's percentile = 50%, loop until change in percentile approaches 0. Here is a list of topics that CON has failed to make a rebuttal against in round. CON has no rebuttal against many of my reasons for problems with the leader board. I claimed that wining against a good debater should be taken into greater consideration than debating against a bad debater. He did not directly challenge the claim, only the definition of ‘good' and ‘bad' debater. CON has no rebuttal against my claim that the leader board for the win ratio board is also inaccurate. He merely claims that one exists. CON has no rebuttal against the claim that the leader board discriminates against newer members. He has no rebuttal against the claim, only that this discrimination is fair. I have shown otherwise. CON admits that "it is not possible for the leader board to ever list the "top debaters" accurately" He has no rebuttal against the following logic argument: 1)It is not possible for the leader board to ever list the "top debaters" accurately. 2)The DDO leader board lists the "top debaters" 3)Therefore, "The DDO leader board does not accurately list the top debaters. Conclusion: When we see the leader board, we want to see who the best debaters are. The leader board provides little system of doing that. Can you imagine if the most wins or win ratio determined the best golfer, regardless of one is competing against. If this was the case, Tiger Woods would not be the best golfer, but some guy who only competes against little kids. What a terrible system! Although I do not know the most accurate way to consideration the COMBINATION of the following factors: win ratio, who one is debating against, and how many debates one has been in, I have provided unrefuted examples of why this system is better than the current system. Through some tinkering and trial and error, all these factors can be implemented to create a leader board that is more accurate than the previous one. I thank CON for accepting this debate and await your response. Sources [1] . http://www.debate.org... [2] . http://www.debate.org... [3] . http://www.debate.org... [4] . http://www.debate.org... [5] . http://www.debate.org...