Back to Forum Games

Sandbox Court

Parudoks
about 8 years

Welcome to the Sandbox Court!

I've realized that a lot of people love to debate about many topics on Epicmafia, but don't have a proper place to express these opinions. Hence, I've come up with Sandbox court. Note: This thread is only for suggesting a case or asking to take part in the next case.

‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍

‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ Current Case: Death vs Justice

Pending Cases

Inbox me if you'd like to join one. Include which ones you want to join, and your stance for them.

  • Do you think Net Neutrality should be protected? If not, what is the benefit of getting rid of it? (Protect: 4) (Don't: 3)

  • Do you believe that vaccination should be mandatory or optional? ‍ (Mandatory: 1) (Optional: 2)

  • Should countries take in Syrian Refugees? Would your answer change if you got to pick which religious groups can enter? ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ ‍ (Yes: 1) (No: 1) (Only specific groups: 0)

  • Barring external factors (i.e. AdSense), should people be banned for hateful comments? This does not include sustained individual harassment. (Participants: 2)

  • Is human cloning justified, and should it be permitted? (Random Teams)(Participants: 1)

How does it work?

Simply put, every Sunday, there will be a thread dedicated to a new court case. You can suggest a court case either in the comments below or in a pm to me, or any other people I designate as hosts. The case will always end on Saturday.

The topic for a court case can be anything, either on or off EpicMafia, but the more interesting it is then the more likely we will pick it. When a topic is picked, anyone can ask to be included in the court case on either side. For example, if the court case is abortion, then you can ask to be on the pro-life or pro-choice side. An example topic you can choose relating to EpicMafia might be whether or not banning users is effective.

On each of these threads, only the people who are debating can comment. However, there will be a poll included that allows users to vote which side they think is winning. This can be used to determine the winner. However, if not enough people vote or if there is a tie, then we might opt for judges to make the final decision.

Despite there being two teams usually in a court case, we will allow more than two if someone can present an additional point of view that differs from the others.

Rules

  • No harassment or personal attacks on the opposition. Doing so will result in a warning, and if continued, it will result in the person being removed from the debate. You are expected to always be respectful during debates.
  • You are NOT allowed to vote on more than one account. If we discover that multiple votes have been placed by you, then you will be disqualified from the voting process. If this was done by accident, please pm me.
  • Stay on topic. If you want to talk about things outside of the debate, then please do it somewhere else. Getting off topic will result in you being removed from the debate.
  • Rules are subject to change anytime for any reason at my discretion. I will inform of any rule changes to avoid confusion.
Sign here if
25 signed
You love to debate with other people because it's fun and allows you to experience the ideas of others from different backgrounds.
Reamix
EpicSides
luis4rod
vom53
shayneismyname
Ashe
dooze
DouradaGrelhada
Furry
Parudoks
barn
riskitforthebiscuit
OhLookACat
LeChuck
YellowPear
chow
JohnMiller
Emjack
Would you consider taking part in this?
22
Yes, I would love to debate!
15
Yes, but I would only vote as the jury.
6
No.
JohnMiller
almost 8 years
Kitt, I'd be willing to cohost if you're still willing. Luis can cohost too if he wants. I think it'd good to have multiple hosts for a court like this (it's easier on everybody's schedules, people can take a week off/week on, less chance of getting called biased)
Kitt
almost 8 years
i'd be interested in co-hosting this with someone
luis4rod
almost 8 years
let's do it
JohnMiller
almost 8 years
Parodouks PMed me a while back saying that he's looking for people to take it over if there's still interest.

I'm interested in participating, and I think cub's voting method is interesting. It would basically run itself as long as enough people participate.
YellowPear
almost 8 years
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᵗᵃᵏᵉ ᵐᵉ ᵇʸ ᵗʰᵉ ʰᵃⁿᵈ, ˡᵉᵃᵈ ᵐᵉ ᵗᵒ ᵗʰᵉ ˡᵃⁿᵈ ᵗʰᵃᵗ ʸᵒᵘ ᵘⁿᵈᵉʳˢᵗᵃⁿᵈ
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᵗʰᵉ ᵛᵒʸᵃᵍᵉ ᵗᵒ ᵗʰᵉ ᶜᵒʳⁿᵉʳ ᵒᶠ ᵗʰᵉ ᵍˡᵒᵇᵉ ᶦˢ ᵃ ʳᵉᵃˡ ᵗʳᶦᵖ
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᵗʰᵉ ᶜʳᵘˢᵗ ᵒᶠ ᵃ ᵗᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ ᶦᵐᵇᶦᵇᵉᵈ ᵇʸ ᵗʰᵉ ˢᵃⁿᵈ
ˢᵒᵃᵏᶦⁿᵍ ᵘᵖ ᵗʰᵉ ᵗʰᶦʳˢᵗ ᵒᶠ ᵗʰᵉ ˡᵃⁿᵈ
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᶜᵃⁿ ʸᵒᵘ ˢᵉᵉ ᵗʰʳᵒᵘᵍʰ ᵗʰᵉ ʷᵒⁿᵈᵉʳ ᵒᶠ ᵃᵐᵃᶻᵉᵐᵉⁿᵗ ᵃᵗ ᵗʰᵉ ᵒᵇᵉʳᵐᵃⁿ
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᵗʰᵉ ᶜʳᵘˢᵗ ᶦˢ ᵉˡᵘˢᶦᵛᵉ ʷʰᵉⁿ ᶦᵗ ᶜᵃˢᵗˢ ᶠᵒʳᵗʰ ᵗᵒ ᵗʰᵉ ᶜʰᶦˡᵈˡᶦᵏᵉ ᵐᵃⁿ
ᴼᶜᵉᵃⁿ ᵐᵃⁿ, ᵗʰᵉ ˢᵉᑫᵘᵉⁿᶜᵉ ᵒᶠ ᵃ ˡᶦᶠᵉ ᶠᵒʳᵐ ᵇʳᵃᶦˢᵉᵈ ᶦⁿ ᵗʰᵉ ˢᵃⁿᵈ
luis4rod
almost 8 years
^ more pls
Kitt
almost 8 years
what happened to this
Parudoks
about 8 years
Also I don't think I'll be posting a Sandbox Court case for this week, or if I do, it'll be up tomorrow or after.
Parudoks
about 8 years

cub says

allow anyone to post in the thread for 2 days after the debate ends and let people assign 3 points to 3 different arguments (posts/quotes), that way you get votes based on arguments and not based on "oh look a poll"


I like this idea! Anyone else who has suggestions also speak up, I'm more than willing to make changes if they improve the game.
cub
about 8 years
you can even make a big bold post like THE JURY IS NOW IN SESSION to feel cool
cub
about 8 years
allow anyone to post in the thread for 2 days after the debate ends and let people assign 3 points to 3 different arguments (posts/quotes), that way you get votes based on arguments and not based on "oh look a poll"
Parudoks
about 8 years
I could make it be like actual court cases, where all the jury members have to agree on the winner if that helps.
Parudoks
about 8 years
I used it because it was the most effective thing I can do. Unless you guys want me to personally decide on who wins, though I figured that might give me way too much power. A straw poll can be easily manipulated and doesn't even let you see who votes in it. Having a forum poll promotes more people to take part in the debate and at least lets us see who voted to some degree.

If they vote based on biases, well, biases exist in everyone. I have no control over that and there will never be a voting system that eliminates bias, so no matter what it will be somewhere in the middle. Unless you're asking what they're supposed to be voting on. In that case, it's supposed to be based on the debate only. However, I cant control if someone decides "Eh, I just want my beliefs to win". This happens in everything, even actual court cases.

As for Jimbei's idea, I am fine with it if people support it. But I feel like the jury will be rather small for this. If I feel like a lot of people would participate in the Jury and would be willing to write up their thoughts like that, then sure.
cub
about 8 years

BaneofMafia says

I agree with a Alyssa. Jury could be volunteers added as players on a topic, without really interfering with the debate unless they have questions. Then they can submit their vote and thoughts on who won (privately or publicly). Jury can include players not currently debating as well.


you would need an equal distribution of judges based on their initial biases

people will naturally and subconsciously bias who they think performed best based on who represented their beliefs most efficiently. this is because people find their beliefs to be logically sound, so any opposing idea would have to therefore be flawed in some way, thus people will succumb to lapses in judgement overlooking the small stuff that might be fundamental to an argument (as all logic is founded on very simple principles)
cub
about 8 years

Parudoks says


cub says

i suggest excluding topics that you already know 90% of people on this site agree on so you dont get another 1 vs 3 "debate" like this capital punishment disaster


The vote was 19 - 17. That's not 90%. And it was a 4 v 4 debate, though one person on each side did not participate at all, making it a 3 v 3 really. Whether or not your teammates were good debaters or actively participated, that's not up to me. But you had the option to pm them at anytime about it if you felt like they were not pulling their weight, and then you could have came to me if they decided they would not be active participants.


it was 1 vs 3 up til the last day

also, you just triggered my trap card:

1. if the poll accurately represents the debate, you can't use the poll as a measure of peoples biases
2. if the poll is just peoples opinions and not about the debate, then why did you use it to determine the winner?

it's somewhere between, which means it's a bad estimate of both of those things
cub
about 8 years
did you use the poll to determine who won the debate

as if people aren't just voting their personal beliefs without reading the thread

don't even need to participate to win based on poll results, just pick the side everyone agrees with
deletedabout 8 years
I agree with a Alyssa. Jury could be volunteers added as players on a topic, without really interfering with the debate unless they have questions. Then they can submit their vote and thoughts on who won (privately or publicly). Jury can include players not currently debating as well.
DouradaGrelhada
about 8 years
put a history of the debates that have happened so far
Alyssa
about 8 years
my suggestion is get volunteers to write a small paragraph each on their thoughts of the debate as a whole(I would happily do that myself as I don't wish to put the time forward to do the debate itself), sort of a closing statement and our thoughts of how the debate went. Give an uneven amount of people and you'll have great feedback and a fair end result

but still keep polls because who doesn't love polls on topics
Parudoks
about 8 years

SirAmelio says

tbh i think you should make a different type of jury, i find it unlikely that people in the poll will vote based on who's debating better rather than their own personal opinion (and i figure the former is the point of this)


I am more than willing to accept suggestions for how the Jury should work. Some people do switch their mind (I've seen some people go from Anti-pineapple pizza to Pro-pineapple pizza because of JohnMiller's arguments). However, I'm not going to pretend that there aren't people who just vote for what they believe automatically, probably without reading any of the debate.
SirAmelio
about 8 years
tbh i think you should make a different type of jury, i find it unlikely that people in the poll will vote based on who's debating better rather than their own personal opinion (and i figure the former is the point of this)
Parudoks
about 8 years

cub says

i suggest excluding topics that you already know 90% of people on this site agree on so you dont get another 1 vs 3 "debate" like this capital punishment disaster


The vote was 19 - 17. That's not 90%. And it was a 4 v 4 debate, though one person on each side did not participate at all, making it a 3 v 3 really. Whether or not your teammates were good debaters or actively participated, that's not up to me. But you had the option to pm them at anytime about it if you felt like they were not pulling their weight, and then you could have came to me if they decided they would not be active participants.
cub
about 8 years
i suggest excluding topics that you already know 90% of people on this site agree on so you dont get another 1 vs 3 "debate" like this capital punishment disaster
YellowPear
about 8 years
An eye for an eye makes everyone blind.
Parudoks
about 8 years
You can always access the current debate by going to the OP and clicking on it's name next to "Current Case". Every debate starts on Sunday, so the next one will not be available for another 2 days.

Also sidenote, if anyone is interested in being a judge, please pm me.