DDO vs Edb8

In the spirit of the final round, I'll offer a few brief summaries as well. What this debate is aboutThis debate is about which side demonstrated that their site has greater utility for its members. I made this point in R1 and it has been one of the few uncontested points in this debate. Obviously, since you're all here, DDO offers value to you. I'm not here to advertise for edeb8 or convince you to join - though, while I'm here, the World Online Debate Cup is coming up soon and y'all should totally compete! What I AM trying to do is demonstrate both that edeb8 does offer real value to its members. Refuted Pro ImpactsMore peopleI agree that DDO has more people. I countered this point in a number of ways. First I showed that edeb8 has features better suited to creating and attracting higher quality members. Second, I demonstrated accounts need not be mutually exclusive. Third, I showed this to be borne out by tournament placings. Fourth, I proved that the average quality on edeb8 is statistically likely to be higher. In terms of impacts, pro provided two: that this attracts even more members, and that this makes it possible to have higher quality debates. The former is begging the question; the latter is refuted by all the evidence. Pro protests that average quality is irrelevant and that the sum of high quality members is more important. My opponent is the top-ranked debater on DDO, and his debate history is filled with far more newbies than experienced debaters. My history's the same, as is (I suspect) the history of most of you. When it comes to the utility both sites offer their members, DDO may have high-quality debates more frequently, but for the individual member, they are rare gems. By raising the average quality of debates, edeb8 achieves much the same end with greater individual utility. Pro also contests that DDO has programmes in place to develop members. In R3 I demonstrated these are worse than edeb8's because 1) edeb8 has more effective, unreproducible tools, 2) edeb8's programmes are not only for newer members, 3) no explicit sign up, and 4) it isn't normalized like on edeb8. None of this pro had any response to. ProfitI do marketing too daily; marketing was my degree. I know that at best, ads only generate money for a site - it is up to the site to convert that money into utility. Which pro has NOT demonstrated. Edeb8 is not a "business" and its value cannot be measured in Wall Street terms. It can be better conceptualized as a charity. Charities like soup kitchens or animal shelters do not usually earn profit, but they provide important value to the world. Pro thinks he's won this point only because he's doing a comparative debate which apparently must be based on "numbers and statistics". Literally, that's his defence on this point. I disagree because numbers don't inherently provide value to anybody. Even if he did somehow win this point, I showed a number of negative externalities of this, such as the heavy presence of advertising on the site (which pro agreed was problematic in R3) and a profit focus that's detrimental to improving user experience as development becomes focused on other issues (not to mention moderation difficulties in removing trolls etc). ConclusionPro has shown that DDO has more members, and earns more money. He has not shown why either of those matter to ordinary members like you and me. When he has given impacts, these either also exist on edeb8 or are better realized by the edeb8 platform. As such, pro's conclusion that DDO is the best is tentative at best. Awesome Con ImpactsFeaturesFeatures provide the clearest impact in this debate on user utility - sites with superior features tend to better satisfy users. I have shown features that simply do not exist on DDO, but which do on edeb8. Secret topics, 4-way debates, cross examination rounds, hidden judges and more are among them. Further, I have shown how these in turn actually improve the user experience, for example by giving users a better platform for self-improvement in judge feedback, built in coaching etc (which, by the way, is much of the evidence behind my "assertion" that edeb8 is better suited to learning that pro thinks didn't exist - not to mention the whole cultural aspect to learning that I keep bringing up and pro keeps not answering). Pro ignored these. A few, such as profile customization, he has repeatedly asserted are "minor" at best, an assertion that is subjective at best. I showed that features such as that satisfy users, and that's what matters in this debate - in this case, giving them the power to determine how they want their site to look. I have shown other ways in which edeb8 one-ups DDO. Socialization is a clear example. Both sites have features for socialization, and DDO is pretty good, but edeb8 does it better. Examples include groups, live chat, shoutboxes and more. Pro claimed the extent is "very similar" making this "not even a valid impact". He did not, however, evidence these claims, especially in light of the fact that:a) "basically [better in] every single way" is a far cry from "very similar" - as I've routinely shown edeb8 includes numerous featurs that frankly are either only poorly done on DDO or entirely impossible; andb) Pro hasn't been able to name a feature DDO has that edeb8 doesn't other than opinions and polls - a point so weak that even pro drops it in the last round. I showed that not only were pro's claims about this inaccurate, but that this was easily offset in other ways. It's true some features can be, very roughly, emulated on DDO. I've done video and team debates on DDO, among many others. But edeb8's having built in support does not merely mean it is EASIER to set up - which is still adding to edeb8's utility, I might add. It's also more visible and more encouraged, which is ideal for developing debaters. Some features can only be emulated on DDO using third-party tools, such as live chats, but then, that's not utility DDO provides - DDO is merely providing the community to chat with. Edeb8 has that, and the community as well, proving its superiority in that respect. Broad AppealA number of times in his case, pro accuses me of only catering to formal debaters, or that I've at some point defined quality to mean formal. It's an obvious strawman because I have made no such claim. I challenged him to source me on that. He couldn't. If you read what he cited, you'll note it says nothing about formality, and even notes that a topic does NOT need to be serious to be quality. While high-quality tournament topics are available as a feature on DDO they are certainly not imposed, and I gave several examples in the debate of features that are specifically targeted towards more casual debaters. Further, I argued that even if edeb8 did not offer this (which it does), diversions on BOTH DDO and edeb8 are generally of an off-site nature, rendering this point moot at best. However, because I have shown features edeb8 has targeted at both serious and non-serious debaters, while pro's so-called "broad appeal" point has only touched on appeal to non-serious debaters. Edeb8 is the only site in this debate that caters to both. Even if edeb8 generally has a more niche audience, it actually offers better value to a broad audience. Other Impacts (that don't really matter)Social SettingPro's concept of a good social setting is clearly one with as many people as possible, and DDO does win on that front. As a result of that, the site is busier. However, I have routinely demonstrated that busy-ness is not vital for having good social interactions. You can have a slow laid-back town, for example, and it can be just as interesting to live in as a major city. Sometimes major cities just don't have the same community feel to them. Sure there are cliques as there are on DDO, but they're not for everybody. Hence why the majority of members do not play Mafia, and do not go on Hangouts, and generally don't NEED to participate in all that. As such, this issue is moot. It comes down to what kind of social setting individuals want, and edeb8 and DDO will both provide the kind of utility they're after. This being said, I did show that even if this were not the case, the social setting is irrelevant because people can leave and come back, and also that most aspects of DDO's social setting exist on edeb8 too to a comparable degree (funny how pro never refuted the maths, numbers and logic I did provide, instead constantly telling judges to go on edeb8 and check for themselves how useless the site is - unfortunately for my opponent, I'm sure judges are smart enough to not make such arguments on his behalf). ConclusionEdeb8 has more features and less people. Both sides in this debate agree on that much. At the end of the day, this debate can swing one of two ways:Option one: You agree that pro has not shown WHY more people is good. Pro's only argument for this, really, in the debate has been an assertion that more people leads to more good debates. However, I have refuted this with a truckload of substantive points throughout my case - notably, by showing that edeb8 is full of great debates. Or, option two: you think pro has shown why. In this case it comes down to whether that "why" single-handedly outweighs the sum of my analysis, including a litany of features and improvements edeb8 has over DDO, and all the net positive impacts this has on edeb8's audience. It's a tall order to fill. The key question you should be asking is which site delivers the net better utility. I agree with pro that this debate is about impacts. It's not about profit, or number of members. It's about impacts. Ultimately only one side can have the greater positive impact on their members. Edeb8 remains, as always, (arguably) the best.