11.08.2017 17:57:26
Euphemia!

---

PlastiqueTiara wrote:

Euphemia! wrote:

marauderverity wrote:

This makes me want to quit the game...what's the point of writing well articulated debates on here?

I agree 100% Why do people bother voting for someone who can't even be bothered to right an answer in the debate. Honestly, I think it might be strategic voting. Obviously, I can't prove it. But the amount of Top 10 players who ALWAYS vote against me in the debates, even if the bimbo hasn't even written anything, is shocking. 

Maybe I should stop voting for the well thought out answers and start voting strategically too?

i don't really think it's fair of you to just assume that my vote on that debate was just some "strategic" move. tbh i wasn't judging on the answer (obvi) but it was because i didn't care for the answer and didn't find it that interesting, so i judged on fashion instead (in which i think the other bimbo was superior).

so next time can we not just jump to conclusions and make "innocent" people look bad?

1. I used the word MIGHT for a reason. Obviously I don't know what your (or anyone else's) intentions are. I thought I made it clear that it was pure speculation (I guess not)

2. So you voted on a debate about MONEY on what the bimbos were wearing. Okay then. There's no rule against it so why not. If that's how you do things when you don't like an answer then fine. I personally would have voted for the bimbo who bothered to write something and actually engage in debate. This is the main reason I feel that debates should be anonymous. 

3.  It's good to know your vote wasn't strategic but I do think some people's votes are. So I stand by what I wrote. That's just how I feel

11.08.2017 19:07:14
PlastiqueTiara

---

@euphemia i'm sorry if i misunderstood you - and it's totally fine that's how you feel, nice to get some other people's thoughts (maybe it can make me think about voting in a different way, who knows).

i just wanted to make sure i wasn't being misinterpreted as my name was in the "debate" picture (which to be fair you didn't post so maybe it was a little weird i quoted you). :)

11.08.2017 19:07:30
Mindy

---

Euphemia! wrote:

PlastiqueTiara wrote:

Euphemia! wrote:

marauderverity wrote:

This makes me want to quit the game...what's the point of writing well articulated debates on here?

I agree 100% Why do people bother voting for someone who can't even be bothered to right an answer in the debate. Honestly, I think it might be strategic voting. Obviously, I can't prove it. But the amount of Top 10 players who ALWAYS vote against me in the debates, even if the bimbo hasn't even written anything, is shocking. 

Maybe I should stop voting for the well thought out answers and start voting strategically too?

i don't really think it's fair of you to just assume that my vote on that debate was just some "strategic" move. tbh i wasn't judging on the answer (obvi) but it was because i didn't care for the answer and didn't find it that interesting, so i judged on fashion instead (in which i think the other bimbo was superior).

so next time can we not just jump to conclusions and make "innocent" people look bad?

1. I used the word MIGHT for a reason. Obviously I don't know what your (or anyone else's) intentions are. I thought I made it clear that it was pure speculation (I guess not)

2. So you voted on a debate about MONEY on what the bimbos were wearing. Okay then. There's no rule against it so why not. If that's how you do things when you don't like an answer then fine. I personally would have voted for the bimbo who bothered to write something and actually engage in debate. This is the main reason I feel that debates should be anonymous. 

3.  It's good to know your vote wasn't strategic but I do think some people's votes are. So I stand by what I wrote. That's just how I feel

I can not speak for this grouping of debates....but I do know that if you debate the same person 3 times and they have not put something in there you will eventually have people voting against you.  Not saying that is the case here...just saying it happens.  There are definitely some teams that pile on and vote against for whatever reason...I see it often...whether it be strategic or not liking someone or simply voting one way because they know the one person or whatever....not much one can do about it outside of learning when the people who tend to vote for you or at least give your debate a fair shot are on and trying to debate more in that time.  That is a reality of RL sometimes to.

11.08.2017 19:30:39
Euphemia!

---

PlastiqueTiara wrote:

@euphemia i'm sorry if i misunderstood you - and it's totally fine that's how you feel, nice to get some other people's thoughts (maybe it can make me think about voting in a different way, who knows).

i just wanted to make sure i wasn't being misinterpreted as my name was in the "debate" picture (which to be fair you didn't post so maybe it was a little weird i quoted you). :)

Hey, I reread my comment and you being upset/ feeling attacked was justified.  No need to apologise :)
My comment wasn't supposed to be an attack and I apologise that it came across that way. 

11.08.2017 19:31:42
Euphemia!

---

Mindy wrote:

Euphemia! wrote:

PlastiqueTiara wrote:

Euphemia! wrote:

marauderverity wrote:

This makes me want to quit the game...what's the point of writing well articulated debates on here?

I agree 100% Why do people bother voting for someone who can't even be bothered to right an answer in the debate. Honestly, I think it might be strategic voting. Obviously, I can't prove it. But the amount of Top 10 players who ALWAYS vote against me in the debates, even if the bimbo hasn't even written anything, is shocking. 

Maybe I should stop voting for the well thought out answers and start voting strategically too?

i don't really think it's fair of you to just assume that my vote on that debate was just some "strategic" move. tbh i wasn't judging on the answer (obvi) but it was because i didn't care for the answer and didn't find it that interesting, so i judged on fashion instead (in which i think the other bimbo was superior).

so next time can we not just jump to conclusions and make "innocent" people look bad?

1. I used the word MIGHT for a reason. Obviously I don't know what your (or anyone else's) intentions are. I thought I made it clear that it was pure speculation (I guess not)

2. So you voted on a debate about MONEY on what the bimbos were wearing. Okay then. There's no rule against it so why not. If that's how you do things when you don't like an answer then fine. I personally would have voted for the bimbo who bothered to write something and actually engage in debate. This is the main reason I feel that debates should be anonymous. 

3.  It's good to know your vote wasn't strategic but I do think some people's votes are. So I stand by what I wrote. That's just how I feel

I can not speak for this grouping of debates....but I do know that if you debate the same person 3 times and they have not put something in there you will eventually have people voting against you.  Not saying that is the case here...just saying it happens.  There are definitely some teams that pile on and vote against for whatever reason...I see it often...whether it be strategic or not liking someone or simply voting one way because they know the one person or whatever....not much one can do about it outside of learning when the people who tend to vote for you or at least give your debate a fair shot are on and trying to debate more in that time.  That is a reality of RL sometimes to.

Thanks for your comments. It helps to understand how things work from an experienced player/debater.

11.08.2017 19:44:27
Mindy

---

Yeah...no problem.  I mean it makes sense that if someone keeps debating someone with nothing to say that eventually people are going to push back on it...I have learned that lesson and voted against it as well.  I mean the ones who get debated by someone with nothing to say over and over and over i itself is a bit beyond ridiculous...we'v all seen that and know there are regulars for it.  sadly...debates are all too often not very much about what one has to say...but again are often like that IRL as well right.  

Personally...How I vote changes from time to time.  I generally vote for someone I am in a relationship or friends with in a debate if they hold their own in it...if I feel like they were plain outdone in it I simply refrain from voting in it.  If there is a vote that already has 2 votes for someone I generally vote for the person w/o a vote unless they have nothing to say or I find their comment ridiculous or something.  "boring bimbos" I dont generally even vote in those...though often there are obvious seeding for Ws and I will sometimes vote accordingly against....wish they would make it so you could only debate a certain person once every 72 hours or something to stem some of that...though I fully admit that I have went back and forth feeding people debates and they I in return 

11.08.2017 20:20:34
Euphemia!

---

Mindy wrote:

Yeah...no problem.  I mean it makes sense that if someone keeps debating someone with nothing to say that eventually people are going to push back on it...I have learned that lesson and voted against it as well.  I mean the ones who get debated by someone with nothing to say over and over and over i itself is a bit beyond ridiculous...we'v all seen that and know there are regulars for it.  sadly...debates are all too often not very much about what one has to say...but again are often like that IRL as well right.  

Personally...How I vote changes from time to time.  I generally vote for someone I am in a relationship or friends with in a debate if they hold their own in it...if I feel like they were plain outdone in it I simply refrain from voting in it.  If there is a vote that already has 2 votes for someone I generally vote for the person w/o a vote unless they have nothing to say or I find their comment ridiculous or something.  "boring bimbos" I dont generally even vote in those...though often there are obvious seeding for Ws and I will sometimes vote accordingly against....wish they would make it so you could only debate a certain person once every 72 hours or something to stem some of that...though I fully admit that I have went back and forth feeding people debates and they I in return 

Everything you've mentioned makes complete sense; I suppose I just needed to read other players perspective on it to fully grasp how people vote in the debates. It does make sense for people to vote for their friends regardless of the answers and it does make sense for people to vote against people who always enter debates against "boring bimbos". Now that I think about it people who debate "boring bimbos" are doing so strategically because they assume they would win (I suppose, upon refection, I am guilty of doing this occasionally). And I do vote for my friends simply because they are my friends instead of actually reading the answers as well.

I think it would be a great idea for a certain person to only debate a certain person once every 72 hours!

I feel incredibly silly now for causing a small commotion over something so minor.

11.08.2017 21:51:40
Mindy

---

Euphemia! wrote:

Mindy wrote:

Yeah...no problem.  I mean it makes sense that if someone keeps debating someone with nothing to say that eventually people are going to push back on it...I have learned that lesson and voted against it as well.  I mean the ones who get debated by someone with nothing to say over and over and over i itself is a bit beyond ridiculous...we'v all seen that and know there are regulars for it.  sadly...debates are all too often not very much about what one has to say...but again are often like that IRL as well right.  

Personally...How I vote changes from time to time.  I generally vote for someone I am in a relationship or friends with in a debate if they hold their own in it...if I feel like they were plain outdone in it I simply refrain from voting in it.  If there is a vote that already has 2 votes for someone I generally vote for the person w/o a vote unless they have nothing to say or I find their comment ridiculous or something.  "boring bimbos" I dont generally even vote in those...though often there are obvious seeding for Ws and I will sometimes vote accordingly against....wish they would make it so you could only debate a certain person once every 72 hours or something to stem some of that...though I fully admit that I have went back and forth feeding people debates and they I in return 

Everything you've mentioned makes complete sense; I suppose I just needed to read other players perspective on it to fully grasp how people vote in the debates. It does make sense for people to vote for their friends regardless of the answers and it does make sense for people to vote against people who always enter debates against "boring bimbos". Now that I think about it people who debate "boring bimbos" are doing so strategically because they assume they would win (I suppose, upon refection, I am guilty of doing this occasionally). And I do vote for my friends simply because they are my friends instead of actually reading the answers as well.

I think it would be a great idea for a certain person to only debate a certain person once every 72 hours!

I feel incredibly silly now for causing a small commotion over something so minor.

You shouldn't...it is natural for people to do this and there are issues there so...

12.08.2017 04:05:33
urban3115

---

Mindy took the words right out of my mouth. I usually go for the unpopular vote if there are already two votes for one person. I'm not sure if votes give you any rewards but I like to encourage new bimbos by voting for them. I also vote by what they wear or how they come across in the forums because most people don't have anything written in their debate columns. I do read the debates, I just don't like the idea of voting for someone's opinion over another if you can understand that. But I see everyone's point. 

12.08.2017 15:14:13
HeavenLeighBimbo

---

The above comment's ^ makes mention of one of my method's that I track the top ten gangs.   I look for groups who are voting for the naked, and opinion-less Bimbos.  Following the voting trend's of those Bimbo's closely.  This is what starts my investigation's.
  I have other methods too,  but those are classified.
 
  I also notice a lot of 'hate vote's towards/against certain player's.   This has to be expected in my situation and it usually doesn't matter much.  2 out of three vote's is all that matter's.
 As Urban3115 mentioned she does, I also like to be the opposition/unpopular vote when someone naked or without a debate message already has 2 vote's, if dressed nicely.   In my opinion the debate become a 'Fashion Duel' at that point for me.
                      That way they don't feel like the outfit the Bimbo made was totally ugly.
                      I think it shows that their effort's to dress a bimbo well, are appreciated by the Prime Bimbo.

   While I like the 72 hour rule another player mentioned,  it is just not a workable solution to the problem at this time.   There is just not enough New Player's joining and staying active to make this possible.   The debates would become unused.  Personally I think it also may feel like Bimboland's is taking away an important freedom of self-determination.   It is a good topic for debate.   I'm keeping an open mind about it,  and will be talking it over with the programmer to see what she think's.....
    The time span would likely be shortened to 24 hours for game play reason's, if implemented as a last resort.
                  I dislike doing anything that take's away freedom's from majority of ethical players,
                                          to stop a minority of criminals/gang's/unethical player's.
   Remember that debates represent the combination of the freedom of expression, and free association with other law abiding player's.  Multi-account maker's are the equivalent of terrorists in Bimboland's.
Taking away the ethical Bimbo's ability to Debate whoever and whenever is just not acceptable to me, in principle.