Resolved: Webcorp should substantially increase the welfare of www.debate.org.

ATTENTION: This is intended to be a Logical Policy Debate round. Meaning a policy round (with inherency, disadvantages, etc.) BUT with evidence only used when absolutely necessary. Please take this into account when accepting the debate or judging it. Rounds 1/2: Constructives Rounds 3/4: Rebuttals I affirm: Resolved: Webcorp should substantially increase the welfare of www.debate.org. (By accepting this debate, please also accept that I can (and am) fiating webcorp rather than the usual federal government.) OBSERVATION 1: INHERENCY/HARMS A) There is no requirement for vote justifications. -When someone goes to vote, they can simply put in their vote without even reading the debate. There are ways to determine who voted for who, but for this takes time and can come down to even a guess when people have similar ideals. Furthermore, this allows people to be able to vote for themselves with the other person hardly even knowing. B) ‘Vote Bombing' has become a regular occurrence. -Certain members of debate.org have deemed it necessary to not leave the ‘regulars' alone and simply vote bomb us. After we discover them, their account is closed and they get another one and do it again. Currently the cell phone system and the voting generalities are good, but have yet to completely fix the problem. Something must be done to stop these atrocities. C) Members are leaving because of the upsetting nature of debate.org. -From the Semi-Final Debate of the first debate.org tournament (member: Darth_Grievous_42) -"I will now officially be able to delete this account so I can finally leave this shamble of what was debate.org. Darth_Grievous_42 out. " -From this, you can draw the conclusions that people want some sort of change in the system. Therefore, I urge people to realize that we must change, the only question is how. D) Debate.org has a message system that is a send/wait/refresh system. -When you message in debate.org, it is to inform. However, webcorb should understand that debaters (on debate.org) like to be able to have discussions that are more real life -which currently they are not able to do in the present system-. Not to mention that there is no current system that allows us to do any form of cross examination. E) Contacting members is based on friend status'. -If I want to contact someone, I need to add them as a friend, or they must open up their inbox -or profile- to everyone. This makes it difficult for me to contact someone I don't know or someone who won't accept me as a friend for whatever reason. F) Running tournaments from debate.org directly is difficult. -Currently, there is a tournament system run off of facebook. However, Webcorp should realize that it would be more convenient for its members if that same tournament could be run on their website with their software. The forum section is good, but is not satisfactory to running tournaments on. OBSERVATION 2: IT IS BECAUSE OF THIS, THAT WEBCORP SHOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE WELFARE OF DEBATE.ORG BY PASSING THE FOLLOWING PLAN: A) Webcorp will require that all votes cast in a debate have a minimum 500 character Reason for Decision (R.F.D). All R.F.D.'s will be available under the ‘votes' category that each debate has. All currently existing debates will be grandfathered in. B) Webcorp will create an instant messaging system that can be initiated from the "Online Friends" section under people, AND can be made optional for debates. If this function is used for debates, it must be specified before the debate begins and will be published after the appropriate speech. If they don't complete ‘Cross Examination' before the speech time ends, then the cross-examination will simply not occur. C) Webcorp will open up inboxes and profile comments to all members from all members unless otherwise specified by the member. This way, it can be private, but only if the person makes a deliberate decision. D) Webcorp will create a group feature. This feature will allow people to make comments, add pictures, add ‘news of the group', allow it to be private, allow it to be secret, allow separate forums, have specific admin's of the group with the power, and make events for groups possible. These Events can be started either from the group or by themselves and they will include the same possibilities of a group but will have an expiration date specified by the creator. E) I reserve the right to clarification, webcorp intent, and webcorp fiat. OBSERVATION 3: SOLVENCY A) Vote bombers will be less apt to vote bomb under 500 character R.F.D. requirements. -If a vote bomber had to write up reasoning to his/her actions every time he/she vote bombed, then it would get annoying and that person would be more likely to stop their actions. Therefore, fewer vote bombings will happen thus substantially increasing the welfare of debate.org. B) Vote bombers that simply put 500 random characters would be easier to spot. -One of the problems with vote bombers is that they can vote and it is hard to tell who did it. However, if they had to write up an R.F.D., then it would be obvious who did it when you have someone who wrote the alphabet 10 times on all of someone's debates. Therefore, if the vote bombers don't go away, they will at least be easier to spot. C) Instant messaging would be awesome. -Simple enough. D) Cross-Examination would add another level of competition for debate.org -If we could not only argue, but also try to trap our opponents into admitting we are right, it would only make debating all the more sweeter. Not to mention that clarification of the debate could also be nice for several people. It's a lot better to understand your opponent BEFORE you make all of your arguments. E) Debate.org members could contact anyone that didn't specifically block the member in question. -This makes it so that I don't feel obligated to add everyone as a friend just so I could message them. F) Tournaments and similar interest groups could finally have a specific place for them to talk WITH privacy options. This would make tournaments smoother and would also allow LDers to talk with LDers and Dolphin fans to talk with Dolphin fans and so on. I therefore urge you to pass the Affirmative plan. I look forward to a response from my opponent!