PetersSmith Works for Juggle

I'm just going to focus on positive arguments this round (maybe this is written in a stream of cosciousness like most of my debates.). I don't have all that much to say. My opponent has accepted my interpretation of how the voters should judge the debate, so that interpretation should stand. If you read this debate, you can keep your preconcieved bias and judge the debate based on what you think is true, but be sure that you mention this voting guideline was mentioned in the debate, and why you accept it. Too YoungPeter Smith has been on the site almost 3 years. She probably started on the site around the same time I did. She is 19 years old now, and was about 16 or 17 when she joined DDO, according to her profile. http://www.debate.org...16 or 17 is way too young to start working at Juggle. Especially when you consider the types of positions they typicall hire for, such as engineering, marketing and senior sales positions, all requiring a college education or a significant amount of experience. http://www.onespace.com... don't know many 16 year olds with an engineering degree or a lot of work experience, so this makes that very unlikely.Moderation I'm sure Peter Smith being a polls moderator is some of the reason for the initial suspicions of her working in some way for Juggle. Maybe some knowledge of how that came to pass should be mentioned. The first and most obvious reason is because she does take pride in creating polls. Making sure they are appropriate and detailed. As annoying as she is, she is one of the more mature users on the poll section, because of the fact it has a younger demographic than the rest of the site. I think the biggest reason she obtained the moderator position is because of some politics. Sometimes people end up as political footballs, it is beyond their control, and the moderation position going to her was kinda dumb luck in that respect, it could have just as easily been some other poll member who became a political football and happened to catch the limelight at the time.In December of 2014 a heated presidential race between Bladerunner and Mikal occurred. http://www.debate.org...The voting criteria was 500 forum posts or 3 debates. I wanted to see Mikal win so I in fact was a large part of helping him win that election, something I regret to this day, more because I think without my efforts he would have lost, and that he could have easily repaid me by doing the bare minimal to get me the votes necessary to beat BSH1. Anyway, we spammed the hell out of eligable voters, something which was usually refrained from at the time, and in fact something not likely to occur so much in this next election. The fact that most of the very active members voted Bladerunner and Mikal won became a sore spot. At the time people were mad that somebody could come on and just do 3 debates and be eligible to vote, while respected members who have contributed a ton could not place votes for president. Changing voter requirements was something hotly debated across the site, and it seemed every time somebody would say the status quo was fine, another member would point to Peter Smith and ask how is it somebody who has only debated 3 times and made no forum posts could vote but Peter Smith was locked out? Here is just one example of Peter Smith being used as a political football, but I assure you it happened several times. MishapQueen: "PetersSmith is excellent at improving the quality of the polls. She has done over 500 quality polls and has been an active member for 5 months. But she is not into debating." (referring to who should qualify to vote.)"She uses the forums, but she's new to that part of it. She is qualified because she has been a tremendous influence in the poll section, and she knew about the candidates and was informed about the election. We even discussed it a good bit." http://www.debate.org...If you look at other threads about voting after that election you will see the same thing. For anyone interested in why new voting standards were being debated so hotly, just know it was because the side that lost was being cry babies and wanted to prevent any populist from ever winning in the future. Anyway....... All this attention on Peter Smith as a political football had everyone saying a bunch of positive things about her, praising her more than maybe she deserved, though the praise was perhaps long over due. With Airmax wanting a polls mod, and him seeing all the praise for Peter Smith, he likely thought she was a good candidate. You see, she was here atleast a year before becoming a mod, and the main reason she became a mod was mostly out of her control, she most definitely did not get that role because she is a Juggle employee. The Linda ProblemConspiracy theories happen for many reasons, but the main one has to do with the conjunction fallacy. I'm going to ask the voters to play along in their head, while I quote this paper: “Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with the issue of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in antinuclear demonstrations. Which of the following is more probable: 1. Linda is a bank teller (T) 2. Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement (T and B)” http://bacon.umcs.lublin.pl...What did you answer? This is a very ogical group here, so I bet most of you picked answer 1, but still a significant numer of readers picked answer 2. Answer 1 is the most likely answer, but don't feel bad if you picked 2. Studies have confirmed most people pick number 2, but why is number 1 correct?Well number 1 is less specific. The more specific of a theory you make, the less likely iy is to be true, and pro has gotten pretty specific. This is not the rebuttal round yet, but a good example of the Linda problem in action is for my opponent to believe that PeterSmith's writing makes her more likely to freelance at one of Juggle's companies, than just writing books as PeterSmith claims. My opponent finds the more specific yet less likely scenario to be of a higher probability. Conspiracy theories happen because of a lack of information usually. We find it naturally fun to fill in the gaps and figure things out. Often times when we lack information we attribute malice to an action. If somebody won't answer our question it is because they are hiding some evil thing about themself. Sometimes it is true that people are hiding their own malice, but usually it is just our imagination. The person who snubbed you by not saying hello was not likely being rude, but they had their mind occupied or they legitimately did not see you. There is also Hanlon's Razor to consider. What Hanon's razor says is: "Never assume malice when stupidity will suffice" https://en.wikipedia.org...The reason being is that stupidity is more common than malice. When you get married, your husband doesn't intentially turn all the clothes pink by throwing a red shirt in with the whites. Your kid doesn't intentionally forget mother's day to hurt your feelings. Peter Smith does not have an heir of authority around her because she secretly is employed by Juggle, likely some much more mundane explanation is likelier. Maybe she is an only child that always got her way, and the heir of authority is just her being herself and likely not even realizing she is doing it or knowing how to fix a problem. There is a reason why only children are bad at making friends. I am not saying that is the case here, but it is far more likely that somebody is an only child than a Juggle employee. Anyway thanks for your arguments Emma, and I look forward to providing rebuttals in the next round