"For reasons above"

[Schnee_One]

I'm sorry, I need to get this off my chest and ask.

We've had discussions regarding FRA and why it's used, but we had many staff members agree that it ultimately leads to lazy votes based off reasoning that may or may not be good, and the result of that leads to frustration, Spite and occasionally flame.

What I want to ask is, what is the reasoning for it not getting banned?

I'm not making a new rule here I just want to know.

 

[VersusJunkie54]

Not everyone has the time and/or patience to give reaons of their own in a VS Battle. Without FRA, then very few matches would ever get done.

 

[ShrekAlmighty]

I agree For reasons above.

 

[VersusJunkie54]

But I do think that if people deicide "X character for X user's reasons" They should at least give a sentence or two long explanation on why the agree with that person's reasons.

 

[Schnee_One]

Not everyone has the time and/or patience to give reaons of their own in a VS Battle. Without FRA, then very few matches would ever get done.

If you have the time to type a "FRA" post, you can very easily give some reasoning to it

"Character X is more likely to use their Hax compared to B" for example, is quick, easy and helpful in a debate.

 

[Schnee_One]

But I do think that if people deicide "X character for X user's reasons" They should at least give a sentence or two long explanation on why the agree with that person's reasons.

Ignore me then, I basically said the same.

 

[Wokistan]

In a formal debate, the objective isn't so much to convince your opposition, but to convince a neutral third party of your argument. Think of FRA voters as that neutral party. Often times, FRA voters don't know the verse particularly well, or don't care about the votes, and as such just FRA for whichever argument is more convincing. Also, banning FRA would cause issues if someone early on lists literally every reason character X can win, and is in effect identical to just typing out the same reasons that are already stated.

 

[Schnee_One]

I'm not asking to necessarily ban "FRA" but it ultimately shouldn't be used be used as a crutch especially when two sides are both giving their points.

Also, stuff where one side has contested the others reasons but people come along and Say "X FRA" is excruciatingly aggervating for everyone.

 

[ShrekAlmighty]

To be honest FRA users are usually IMO knowledgable on the character/verse they are voting for and they are voting FRA just to give them an extra vote not cause they actually read the arguments in the thread.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

FRA was allowed to keep threads from having redundant/repeated "walls of text" flood the thread. Although like all things, there are pros and cons to it. I am neutral honestly.

 

[Schnee_One]

That is an issue that I have right there.

You are not voting because you agree with the reasons, you are giving a vote just to give the preferred character a win.

 

[Wokistan]

FRA voting mid debate is annoying yeah, but not allowing that is incredibly difficult to enforce given that even if a debate is otherwise done and people start with the FRAs someone could just say some random stuff at the end. That sort of thing is what grace periods are for. Ultimately, this is just going to be an issue that exists, as the fixes would cause more issues.

 

[VersusJunkie54]

FRA may be a nessecary evil to prevent clutter as Dragonn Said, and to make sure VS battles are actually able to get done.

 

[GyroNutz]

I don't see the difference between saying 'FRA' to what someone considers as a legit argument compared to copy and pasting/rewording said argument.

This is completely trivial, and banning FRA isn't a solution to stopping lazy votes. It will instead cause more thread inactivity, especially on threads with already detailed and legitimate reasons for one side

 

[AstralKing7]

I agree with this. FRA can sometimes be counted as votes agreeing with someone else who has been wrong and are failing to prove their points but still gets counted

 

[Schnee_One]

I explicitly said I'm not banning for reasons above twice.

You don't need to type FRA, Quick reasoning is enough to get by and still keep a debate.

"X character via being naturally bloodlusted and leading with X hax" is still thousands of times better.

 

[ShrekAlmighty]

FRA should be changed to for example: Reinhard wins for Gargoyles reasons as such we know the users atleast read a bit of the thread and didnt rush in on going FRA and if Gargoyles reasons were debunked later on we can know that they didnt read the actual arguments rather just voted cause they prefer the character.

 

[Schnee_One]

Makes sense

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I don't think it should ever count as a valid reason. It only serves to allow circle-jerking and spamming on threads which artificially increase a side's votes. At the very least say why you agree, mention which person and what arguments made you agree.

 

[VersusJunkie54]

To an extent, FRA is a nessecary evil. But As I've said, they should at least provided a sentence or two of reasoning as to why they agree with one side.

 

[Wokistan]

Seems fair enough, or at least specify who's reasons they agree with so that vote can be removed if that person's vote is debunked, as was suggested above. Even debate judges usually give an explanation as to why the winner won.

 

[ThisIsMySwagPack]

I think that every vote should containt a sentence or two explaining your reasoning behind the vote. If you really are interested in a versus match, then this shouldn't be a problem for you.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

While I remain neutral.

The issue with these votes is that we end up with very barren threads added to files. Also these votes as many stated can, have and will be used for bias and spite.

This is by far the biggest issue with it. Lets have an example.

Character X has one good reasoning to why said character will win.

Character Y counters points with other abilities, but not to a "debunk degree", but said reasons are objectively better than character X.

However, fans of Character X pop up and just say "X FRA". Suddenly we got like 7-15 votes for Character X and like 1 or 2 for Character Y. Said thread is then added before anymore support for Character Y can appear, or that side Y cannot hope to close the gap. This despite character Y having better reasoning.

^This is an issue with FRA.

 

[The_Everlasting]

The thing is after a point votes would just start getting redundant. If a user says the reasons you think a character could win a fight, what's the point in just repeating what they've already said?

For instance, in Scorpion vs. Samurai Jack, MrKingOfNegativity wrote out extremely elaborate reasonings for why Jack would be the victor. If he's already said why this is the case, what's the point of just repeating his argument with your own phrasing rather than just say you think Jack wins for reasons that have already been given?

 

[Kaltias]

You know, i'd rather have people repeating the reasons.

"But Kal that's the same as saying for reasons above"

To an extent yes. But at least it forces them to read the thread at least a bit. And it avoids people from voting "FRA" even if they literally don't know the reasons (which happened btw)

 

[TISSG7Redgrave]

tbh i feel like FRA is something that is kind of needed as ever pointed out but also a fact if a person can't exactly look at the arguements of have nothing to say what's the point of just saying what is already established in the thread?

 

[Super_Saiyan_God_Julian]

Ideally, people should specify which reason they are agreeing with and why.

 

[AstralKing7]

While I remain neutral.
The issue with these votes is that we end up with very barren threads added to files. Also these votes as many stated can, have and will be used for bias and spite.

This is by far the biggest issue with it. Lets have an example.

Character X has one good reasoning to why said character will win.

Character Y counters points with other abilities, but not to a "debunk degree", but said reasons are objectively better than character X.

However, fans of Character X pop up and just say "X FRA". Suddenly we got like 7-15 votes for Character X and like 1 or 2 for Character Y. Said thread is then added before anymore support for Character Y can appear, or that side Y cannot hope to close the gap. This despite character Y having better reasoning.

^This is an issue with FRA.

This pretty much sums up everything wrong with "FRA"