THBT Debate.org should pay fifteen qualified judges to decide wins/losses instead of using votes

CON has forfeited the last round. Even after being given an extra amount of time, as CON requested, CON still refused to post anything. Only after BOTH deadlines given did CON post. Never mind, I will still accept CON's argument (which is in the comments) and respond to them. Hello to CON and people reading this debate. In this next round, I will first talk about the importance of winning in a debate. Then, I"ll be discussing about how not having qualified judges in a debate does more damage to serious debaters" debates on Debate.org than having qualified judges does to the so-called "playful" debates. Next, I will talk of the bad long-term effects not having proper judges will have on Debate.org. I will also be talking about the biasness of some voters, who may be voting for a side just because their friends are arguing for that side. #1 Why winning in a debate is not to be taken lightly Give a child a cookie for doing something wrong and he'll do the wrong thing again. The reason we reward someone is because that someone did something right. In the case of a debate, that someone needs to be rewarded with a win because he or she did better than his or her opponent. If someone is rewarded wrongfully, that someone is sure to make the same mistakes over and over again. If someone is voted rightfully, he or she is surely going to be encouraged to do as well next time (not necessarily all the time though, as I will further elaborate in this same post). #2 Having judges will not disrupt "your mom" and other debates with playful topics, however, not having judges will disrupt serious debates. CON very blindly assumes that judges won"t want to judge debates having playful topics. Well that is simply ridiculous because before applying for the job, obviously these judges will be notified about the types of debates that go on in Debate.org (they"d probably go check it out for themselves as well!), and this notice will obviously include playful topics. And I dare you to tell me that of the hundreds of judges around the world, none of them would want to judge a fun debate. And since nearly anyone can judge a fun debate, it is very safe to assume that these judges will be able to too. However, not everyone knows how to judge a serious debate and give it constructive feedback or at least they won"t be able to do it as well as qualified judges would (I think I"ve already mentioned why in the previous round). And this is where the judges would really come in handy. And it"s not as if there are very few serious debates on Debate.org. Just look- out of twenty topics on the first two pages of the site, I have found thirteen that are serious debates: Is Abortion Moral? Should cigarettes be legal? Should children have the right to choose their learning and education? Presidential Term Limits (US) Science is a major threat to human existence Women are tools for cleaning & cooking, and for pumping out babies shold we spend money to plant 100 billion trees to offset carbon immissions? Since children are necessarily property, is it moral and ethical to monetize children? Should the draft be extended to women too! Freedom Of Religion: Secular Law/Society Vs. Islamic Law/Society Polygyny As Prescribed In Islamic Law Should Not Be Permitted Education: Secular System Vs. Islamic System WODC: This House Believes That Provisions of Internet Services Should be a Public Utility So with this many serious debates, someone qualified really ought to judge them and these qualified people should not be those debating in "your mom" debates. #3 Bad long-term effects on Debate.org if there aren"t proper judges Soon, if there aren"t good judges on Debate.org, the quality of debaters here will surely drop. This is for two reasons, both of which are caused by the terrible quality of the voters" judging. The first reason is that with bad judging, people may be rewarded with wins that they don"t necessarily deserve. Therefore, as I"ve mentioned, they might make the same mistakes again. And even if they are rightfully judged, without the constructive feedback of some qualified judges, they will not know how to improve next time. The second reason is that those good debaters who aren"t in fact swayed by terrible voting, may not like the site because of the trashy way it handles wins and losses. Therefore, these debaters will not want to debate on Debate.org anymore because of the wins they deserved but may not necessarily have gotten. Next, to my rebuttals #1 Some, while not all, will be swayed by wins/losses CON assumes that people won"t be swayed by wins/losses. Well, remember what I said about giving a child a cookie for doing something wrong? While not everyone will be swayed, some who are weak in character will be. #2 On monetisation I wasn"t talking very seriously in terms of the examples given- my point was just to let you know that there are ways for Debate.org to pay it"s judges. And the reason why I refuse to harp further on this is because this debate is about why we should implement judges- the technical issues can be solved later. #3 Improvement is better than consistency. In our world today, things are always updating- from technology to video games. I believe that Debate.org should too. This change is not going to betray anyone who is already in the website of course, because user participation is still happening through comments and of course the debates themselves and also because it"s not just an evolution- it"s an update! And update means improvement! I want to end this point by saying this: do you want to stay with your bicycle, or move on to a car? Do you want to continue using a typewriter or start using a laptop? Do you want to continue using votes, which destroy Debate.org"s debaters" qualities or start using judges to improve their debating quality while still not disturbing the fun "your mom" debates? In conclusion, debaters may come to Debate.org for a fun time, but it will be blind to assume that all of them do. Some of them come to improve their skill also, and without doing much damage to those who want to have fun, we want to hire some judges to help those who come to improve their skill in debating. If this system goes on, not only will the website destroy it"s own good debaters; it will also shoo them away.