OFFICIAL FEATURE REQUEST THREAD

Someone once complained that edeb8 still has forfeits. I agree.
Is there anyways to eliminate them entirely?

Blackflag: Can you elaborate on what this would actually entail? Like, no time limits on a debate?

admin: Can you elaborate on what this would actually entail?
Is there anyways to eliminate them entirely?
I cannot answer a question I just asked you

Blackflag: Well it's just that it's not a very specific feature. More like just a goal. I do a few things to discourage forfeits (like the introduction of autoforfeiting) but ultimately if somebody runs out of time, what's the website to do?

admin: Oh, I guess I was being vague. Here is one idea that may work. When one side doesn't meet the deadline, it continues to the next round without the placeholder "round forfeited." For example, if pro doesn't meet the deadline in one round, then it doesn't go to con the next, but pro again. If con does not meet the deadline, then the debate continues allowing con one more chance to post. As per usual, the debate ends upon two consecutive "time outs," eradicating forfeits and making sure debates remain conventional.

That way everyone gets conventional speaking patterns (pro then con) and the annoyance of forfeits no longer burden anyone.

Blackflag: That's precisely the same as if you just double the length of time of a round, except that it wouldn't have the text "round forfeited" (which makes no sense because people will wonder why the round ended if they're not told).

admin: Actually it does make sense. Forfeits seem to happen regardless of round length. No one accepts a debate, and the time limitations, with the exception of forfeiting. I recognize two things.
1. The "round forfeited" placeholder is annoying and is a serious problem plaguing the site.
2. It is detrimental to conventional debating when con is replying to a forfeited pro, and vice versa.

* sorry, no one accepts a debate with the expectation of forfeiting

Blackflag: 1. What kind of placeholder should there be instead?
2. So long as there are time limits, there will be forfeits. I just don't see any third option.

admin: 1. None, the debate should continue on the round it was on
2. If one side fails to meet the deadline, then their round is extended, not progressed. That is a viable third option.

Blackflag: Yeah but if you can forfeit indefinitely, what is the time limit there for?
If you can't forfeit indefinitely, then eventually you'll need a placeholder to let people know what's happened.

admin: As per usual, the debate ends upon two consecutive "time outs," eradicating forfeits and making sure debates remain conventional.

Blackflag: Yes, two consecutive time outs = double the length of a round. Ending the debate at that time = autoforfeit. All already available.

But what placeholder is shown when that happens?

Yes, two consecutive time outs = double the length of a round..
No one takes a debate expecting to forfeit. It just doesn't happen. I wont take a debate if I feel I cannot make the deadline. Forfeits are unexpected events. The extension is a legitimate fix to a problem with your debating format.

Ending the debate at that time = autoforfeit
Who would want a debate to end after one forfeit? Why do you think autoforfeit is so unpopular on customized created debates?

All already available
If only they were fixing a problem relevant to what we are discussing.

But what placeholder is shown when that happens?
Nothing at all. The debate ends. If you truly want you could add an italicized message somewhere, but I wouldn't waste to much time explaining why the debate ended.

Blackflag: Way to dodge the important question I asked.

I know nobody expects to forfeit, but if people get second chances then that's the amount of time they'll expect to be able to use. I can guarantee you that nobody will treat this any different than a simple doubling of post length time.

If users don't want to end the debate after only one forfeit, they can turn autoforfeit off and the debate will end after 2 consecutive forfeits. Again, I don't believe the end result will actually be any different.

Blackflag: Sounds exactly like a round forfeited notification to me. Or if I use nothing at all, sounds like I'm going to spend at least a week of my life in future explaining to people why:
1) their opponents got free extensions on their debates that they didn't, and
2) their debates ended with no notification

admin: I know nobody expects to forfeit, but if people get second chances then that's the amount of time they'll expect to be able to use. I can guarantee you that nobody will treat this any different than a simple doubling of post length time.
Well good thing I'm advocating for doubling the posting time (or even a one or two day extension). The issue with what you are saying, is that debates do not have a standard time limit. If someone forfeits, they did so unexpectedly. An extension allows the debate to continue without screwing up the debate format. I'm not pleased that 80% of our debates get jacked up do to forfeits.

Again, I don't believe the end result will actually be any different.
Then you are again wrong. Debates continue perfectly normal. A debate where con posts in a round where pro doesn't, or vice versa, will never happen again. A great fix to a flaw in your debate format.

Sounds exactly like a round forfeited notification to me. Or if I use nothing at all, sounds like I'm going to spend at least a week of my life in future explaining to people why:
1) their opponents got free extensions on their debates that they didn't, and
2) their debates ended with no notification
You do not have to explain anything, much less take a week of your time doing so. People need to learn how the site works somehow. You're either explaining things before or after the fact.

Blackflag: "A debate where con posts in a round where pro doesn't, or vice versa, will never happen again."
Yes it can. Simply by having autoforfeit unchecked your format would be exactly the same as mine except with:
1) double the post time, and
2) a deceptive countdown timer that doesn't tell people their true amount of time remaining

"If someone forfeits, they did so unexpectedly."
Only at present. I can assure you, if your thing were to happen, I would never post on time again and forfeit every round, because I would get double the time to post my round that way. It would be utterly stupid to post on time.

"I'm not pleased that 80% of our debates get jacked up do to forfeits."
The figure is significantly lower, but ultimately consider that 80% of our members have never even debated. A lot of people just lose interest, particularly newer members. And often I think confusing rules like this are part of that.