DART's original elo rating system needs to be revived.

We have the Ultra-Rated tournaments as the new source of ranking, which in of itself in a system of self-sabotage for generating traffic. Only a certain number of people can join at a time, so inclusivity is a problem for competitors.

We can't even get enough people to fill tournaments. The tournaments were because no one was doing UltraRated debates.

Tournament outcomes take too long, and there are very little to no updates. And the requirement for entering each round serves as a deterrent for participation at all.

This is because people rarely vote. We could have dozens of debates and fewer votes or lower quality votes, which is what we have for casual and rated debates. But since we already have that, why do we need it for UltraRated?

It is the incentive for participation. DART had the ultimate elo rating system (pre-2023 update), and this was when site activity was peaking. There were consistent debates, and debating was actually fun.

I mean we have this for rated and casual debates. This was the default elo for months, and switching UltraRated to be the default hasn't resulted in fewer casual and rated debates. You can still see rated elo.

This is because people rarely vote. We could have dozens of debates and fewer votes or lower quality votes, which is what we have for casual and rated debates. But since we already have that, why do we need it for UltraRated?

Voting expectations can be clarified in the forums. Tests to be granted such privileges are unnecessary and already diminish voting quantity.

Votes not according to established standards & criteria can be removed, until quality is up to par.

And volunteers can always be selected. Established voters like you or whiteflame have no need to pass a test.

I mean we have this for rated and casual debates. This was the default elo for months, and switching UltraRated to be the default hasn't resulted in fewer casual and rated debates. You can still see rated elo.

Compared to the DART average, the number gap of debates is wide.

The Ultra-Rated is stifling member potential.

Voting expectations can be clarified in the forums. Tests to be granted such privileges are unnecessary and already diminish voting quantity.

Votes not according to established standards & criteria can be removed, until quality is up to par.

People hate vote removals already. I'd argue that does more to discourage voting than a test that only applies to one specific kind of debate. And again, none of this is limiting standard and rated debates. DART didn't even have more than those two kinds, and we no longer have requirements on rated debates, so we are arguably more accessible than DART in this regard.

Compared to the DART average, the number gap of debates is wide.

That's due to it being a new community, not the voting standards. People aren't failing to do rated debates because it's hard to do UltraRated debates, many don't even know UltraRated exists.

People hate vote removals already

I suggest not doing vote removals at all in rated debates. Any punishment to voters acts to discourage voting. Let people compete in chaos. Chaos is more fun.

Dont make the mistake of overmoderation. Any punishment for activity discourages activity as a whole. this site will only grow good if it can please greatest variety of users, and forcing all users into one same behavior type loses a lot of users. One can only afford to raise standards once one can afford to lose users, and right now I would welcome even worst trolls on this site because almost anything is better than a site with no activity.

Also, I have said this before, someone should program live chat for this site, similar to discord chat where you can see who is typing, who is online...ect. I mean, just tell Claude AI to do it. this site needs innovation and variety. We need to be more like discord or tik tok with their group chats, and less like some forum from year 2000.

I currently lead the debaters in volume of debate voting, but speaking of making voting an attractive activity, I do not sense my leadership herein has chaaged my overall rating because I started with DCraft 8 months ago with far fewer votes, but decided here to make a greater effort. So, what is the precise, practical incentive to vote?

Well, voting on UltraRated debates allows you to do UltraRated debates, which have 3 guaranteed high-quality votes each.

I either do not understand what you mean, or don't see where that advantages one's rating

Because you need to do ultrarated to get ultrarated elo

But was DA ever ultra rated? And is debate truly only a zero sum activity, which elo addresses? Debate can result in a tie, and that's not zero sum. So why is the term, elo, used? It's not an acronym. but the inventor of the technique, a chess master, Arpad Elo. But chess is not always zero sum, either...