LancelotDuLac

Featuring Debate Craft's first official TRT tournament.

The three subjects that determine the resolutions and debate material are poetry, philosophy, and history.

Here are some important ground-rules to lay out.:

1. Only four people will participate in the first stage, but anyone is free to sign-up. Those who are not chosen will remain in the queue and if one the participants drops out, they will be replaced by someone from the queue. And that resignee will be disbarred from participating in the second stage of the tournament.
2. The second stage of the tournament shall include a series of people doing live or pre-recorded debates on the YT channel. It will be separated into rounds.
3. This is the first stage. If you have issues regarding availability or schedule, please communicate this directly while signing up and request any time accommodations you may need.

This first stage of the TRT is strict and exclusive, but the second stage shall be different.

Anyone can vote. But this first stage will require at least one voter who is willing to make a video vote on the tournament debates on the DebateCraft YT channel.

(If you were on DART, think WeaverofFate.)

To register, type /in and specify whether you wish to be a debater or the voter representative for the YT.

Debaters:

1. Empty
2. Empty
3. Empty
4. Empty

Voter:

1. Empty

I will be voting on ALL of the debates in this tournament.

That's a promise.

Now in the past, the lack of voters may have been a problem. Or cramming in a vote before the judging timeline expired may have presented a problem, and I'm assuming that all would-be or potential voters were overwhelmed and burned out by this process.

So I'm going to suggest an obvious a solution.

Know which debates you plan to vote on ahead of time. And have several google docs open for each of those debates, and begin the voting process while the debate is going on to give yourself a headstart.

Rather than attempting to do all the work when the debate is finished.

If you wait until the very end, you're going to be frustrated and try to speed through the work it takes to vote. And you're going to miss like 90% of the debate. But if you vote AS the debate is going on, you only have to commit to memorizing 1 or 2 arguments at a time. So keeping a recap, and reminders of both sides in a google doc will save you time, effort, and work.

If you have a tournament debate that is currently active, please submit the link to it here in this thread for me to keep track.

I don't wish to miss any.

This post does not apply to those who don't debate. Those who stick purely to the forums can have their bread and butter.

It's time for a field day in the world of legitimate complaints.

Elo is currency, both on DART and DebateCraft.

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.

When the update hit, everything was fucked.

Elo scores stagnated, even for consistent debaters with a high win-rate.

This is less of a complaint, as it is a genuine criticism. If you are someone that enjoys recreational or competitive debate, then I can't be alone in feeling this way. The site eventually grew quieter. That was Mike's biggest fuck-up.

If the ultimate goal is to grow the site, then this is an issue that needs to be addressed.

And I don't see the platform generating any traffic, until this obvious problem gets resolved.

Currently, the elo rating system for this site focuses too much on punishing loss, than it does on rewarding victories.

The way casinos entice gamblers is with the promise of a potential victory, and that thrill is their incentive for participating. That risk-reward ratio reinforces the cycle of addiction.

But now, victories have been rendered meaningless.

The reward has been completely removed from the risk-reward ratio, and now all we're left with is the risk.

This is why we have no high rollers.

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.

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.

Sites like Chess.com and Lichess.org do very well because they use a reliable elo system.

If you want a growing site rather than a stagnating one.

Forget the advertisements, forget the controversy, forget the server, and forget the YT channel.

Those come later.

Fix the Elo system first.

The whole point for a new product, is it is meant to surpass the original.

It's been 4 years, so why are we settling for an inferior ranking system?

(I am not criticizing forum posters by the way. I just meant that this thread will be pointless for you, if you are not a fan of debating on this site.

But if any of you disagree. Please share your thoughts.)

Suffering is a natural part of human life.

There was a quote, but I forgot who it was from, "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one." Which was particularly profound in its meaning and application.

Optimism is acceptable, but it has the potential to do more harm than good. Same with pessimism. (I know cynicism is the more common word, but it has a different meaning. Using it in this context would be misusing the word.)

1. Use the same structure as classic mac: pasta + roux (fat + flour) + milk + melty cheese, then bake with a crunchy topping.
2. Choose richer plant products (high fat, unsweetened, unflavored) to mimic dairy’s body and mouthfeel.

Core ingredient blueprint

For about 1 lb (450 g) dry pasta (elbows or cavatappi):

1. Pasta
2. 1 lb elbow or cavatappi pasta, boiled in well‑salted water until just shy of al dente.
3. Fat and roux
4. 5–8 tbsp vegan butter (not margarine if possible; pick one with a rich, buttery flavor).
5. 5–8 tbsp all‑purpose flour to make a thick roux, just like classic mac.
6. “Milk” base
7. 4–5 cups unsweetened, unflavored extra‑creamy oat milk or soy milk.
8. Optional: ½–1 cup unsweetened dairy‑free “heavy cream” or barista‑style cream (oat or soy) for extra richness.
9. Vegan cheeses (the big key to realistic flavor)
10. Use a blend; single cheeses taste more “fake.” For example:
11. 8 oz vegan cheddar shreds (e.g., Violife, Follow Your Heart, Daiya “cutting board,” etc.).
12. 4–8 oz vegan Colby Jack or mozzarella shreds for stretch and mildness.
13. ¼–½ cup finely grated vegan parmesan for sharpness.
14. Optional: 2–4 slices of a melty “American” or “creamy original” vegan cheese to boost melt and creaminess.
15. Cheesy flavor boosters (this is what makes it taste “real”)
16. 2–4 tbsp nutritional yeast (gives umami, “aged cheese” vibes).
17. 1–2 tsp dijon mustard or ½–1 tsp mustard powder (classic mac trick for sharpness).
18. ½–1 tsp lactic acid powder or 2–3 tsp lemon juice or a splash of apple cider vinegar for that subtle tang of aged cheese.
19. ½–1 tbsp white or light miso paste (deep savory, replaces some of cheese funk).
20. ½–1 tsp onion powder.
21. ½–1½ tsp garlic powder.
22. ½–1 tsp smoked paprika (for color and depth; use less if you don’t want smokiness).
23. A small pinch of nutmeg (very classic in béchamel; go light).
24. Seasoning
25. Salt to taste (start with 1–1½ tsp kosher salt in the sauce, then adjust).
26. ½–1 tsp black pepper.
27. Optional: tiny pinch cayenne for the faint warmth many “real” macs have.
28. Topping for baked texture
29. 1–2 cups panko breadcrumbs or crushed plain crackers.
30. 2–4 tbsp melted vegan butter.
31. Pinch of salt, pepper, paprika, and a little extra vegan parmesan if you like.

A lot of people are going to dismiss the AI recipes, but in reality, they're pretty useful. It's no different than googling.

I posit this interesting thought experiment.

Both Sun Tzu and Miyamoto Musashi had this same idea, described in different versions. All strategists or of the like were masters of economy.

"The supreme art of warfare is to subdue the enemy without fighting."

While this quote can be interpreted to mean that pacifism is a superior means of combat, the actual context is that one should bear arms only whenever necessary, but that resolving things diplomatically or waging psychological warfare are more practical options of victory because the sacrifice is lesser.

Every decision has a cost and a kingdom that manages to win the war by fighting off the attacker has lost plenty of invaluable resources, wasted lives for a temporary victory.

Yes, they've won. But for how long? This is what we call a pyrrhic victory.

What are your thoughts?