Jury vs Televote

[A-lister]

Point out to me a single time when I've trumpeted by opinion around as if it were fact, where I made factual statements that I couldn't back up when prompted.

I don't need to do this, I'm not having that urge you have sorry. I'm here to discuss, not to jump on people's back.

Neither is saying "The juries are still goverend by diaspora and neighbour voting patterns".

Never said this, just as I never said some other things you made up about me (like the Yohanna thing).

You clearly think that anyone who disagrees with you is mistaken, seeing as how you just told Matt that (though not in so many words).

If Matt would have problem with me, he could speak for himself, he doesn't need your assumptions as guidance.

I've discussed issues like this with Matt many times, but as I said although we may not agree, we do share a mutual respect still.

Anyways I suggest you simply don't answer my posts in the future, it'll be for the best for both of us. I am and never will be in here to report to you or prove you anything. I will share my opinion and I will write interpretation on things whether you allow me to or not.

 

[FallenAngelII]

I don't need to do this, obviously you have an urge to do this yourself though, I understand that this is a discussion forum and people will share their opinions and it's simple.

Again, this is a debate. In debates, opinions clash. And one generally tries to prove the opposition wrong, whether they're making factual statements (which you do, whether you mean to or not) or simply airing their opinions.

I've discussed issues like this with Matt many times, but as I said although we may not agree, we do share a mutual respect still.

I would've had respect for you as a debater had you actually responded to my counter-arguments curteously in the languages-thread instead of simply saying something along the lines of "Well, I disagree!" and then fleeing the thread.

 

[A-lister]

^
Again why you have this urge to question people? Just let them have their opinions it's actually non of your business.

And no, I'm not here to hand in reports to you or anything. My opinion is clear and people know what I stand for and that's it. You disagree? Fine, you're welcome, that's YOUR opinion (or what you want to call it).

I would've had respect for you as a debater had you actually responded to my counter-arguments curteously...

This comment summed it up pretty well. You even admit you didn't give me respect from the get-go since the discussion didn't go your way. Why are you even surprised then I have no interest in discussion with you? I'm not spending my time with people who don't show respect, it's simple.

Do both of us a favor now and stop this finally.

 

[FallenAngelII]

^
Again why you have this urge to question people? Just let them have their opinions it's actually non of your business.

This is how debates work:
Party A presents their thesis.
Party B presents theirs (usually the direct opposite off Party A's).
Both parties tries to disprove the other.

If you engage in a debate, you need to prove your own arguments. Simply throwing out opinions and then saying "It's my opinion." isn't debating. It's not even being open to debate. In fact, that's the very definition of thinking your opinion trumphs all and being intolerant of the opinions of other people.

This comment summed it up pretty well. You even admit you didn't give me respect from the get-go since the discussion didn't go your way. Why are you even surprised then I have no interest in discussion with you? I'm not spending my time with people who don't show respect, it's simple.

Didn't go my way? The majority of posters in the thread agreed with me and disagreed with you. I proved your, ahem, opinions wrong. You failed to prove your statements. Then you left the thread. At which point you lost any respect I might've ever held for you as a debater.

Even now you persist that you didn't "lose" the debate or that you failed to prove your own statements and points. You insist that you were merely presenting your opinion and as such, you did not need to substantiate them with evidence and facts. That is not debate. That is throwing your opinion around, seeing if people will agree, slap yourself on the back if they do and just pack up and leave without a word if they don't.

Every time you post something and I question its validity as an argument, you state either:
* "It's my opinion. And I'm entitled to it. (How dare you question it? It's an opinion. It doesn't need proof!)"
* "I don't have to prove myself to you."

Also, you do not have to have actual respect for your opponents in a debate in order to have meaningful debates. As long as you both stick to the issues, the resulting debates can still be interesting and hold meaning.

 

[A-lister]

Every time you post something and I question its validity as an argument.

See this is your problem. You have to question the validity of what someone say in here, like they have to report to you. This is where you differ from other people in here. I don't have any interest to discuss with someone who is writing "you're a liar, prove yourself to me".. who the f do you think you are!?

Anyways you are just a provocateur and I was just dumb falling for it. You clearly have nothing constructive to say yourself, people who only feel some urge on jumping on others and doesn't have anything else to say are very uninteresting people indeed.

And as a provocateur you simply doesn't understand where to stop either, you just go on and on.

Who are you to "teach" people around here how to debate or discuss things? Sorry mr. almighty, but you're no more or less than anyone else in here, your opinion is not worth more or less, so deal with it.

But this is my last answer to your constant provocation, it's just useless to feed your excitement to argue with people. You bring nothing to this forum, you have no actual own opinion. An opinion is not the same as having an urge to question "validity" of another person's opinions and interpretations, that's just plain stupid. This is a musical forum, not a political debate.

If you have anything off-topic to say again you can atleast do it via PM, this is not a topic to argue back and forth. Unfortunately I see you getting some sort of kick out of doing it.

Do not answer me again, I've asked you a million times already.

 

[FallenAngelII]

See this is your problem. You have to question the validity of what someone say in here, like they have to report to you. This is where you differ from other people in here. I don't have any interest to discuss with someone who is writing "you're a liar, prove yourself to me".. who the f do you think you are!?

No... I question the validity of their arguments... in debates. It's what one does n debates.

Anyways you are just a provocateur and I was just dumb falling for it. You clearly have nothing constructive to say yourself, people who only feel some urge on jumping on others and doesn't have anything else to say are very uninteresting people indeed.

Disproving your arguments =/= Jumping on you

Who are you to "teach" people around here how to debate or discuss things?

Because you clearly do not know how debates work.

Sorry mr. almighty, but you're no more or less than anyone else in here, your opinion is not worth more or less, so deal with it.

"How debates work" is not an opinion. It's a fact.

You bring nothing to this forum, you have no actual own opinion.

'This makes sense how?

This is a musical forum, not a political debate.

It doesn't mean there can't be debates had here.

What would be the point of a forum where one only puts forth one's opinions without debate? "I like cookies!" "I don't" "I do" "OK then".

Do not answer me again, I've asked you a million times already.

Then stop replying.

 

[Matt]

C'mon folks. Let's not get caught up in accusations and focus on the important stuff.

Interestingly enough I realized that I tend to agree with FallenAngel a lot (not just this topic) we just have a different style of delivery.

I guess the thing that I am questiong is the fact that the juries are being accused of not doing their job with not sufficient data available.
A-lister, you mentioned in one of your posts that a 11th place for Greece or an 8th place for Turkey is still way too good.
To me that's a slight contradiction of some of the statements you made in the past such as France 2010 were you critizised the fact that juries were out of touch with the televoters and viewers interest but in this case you're saying the jury and televote results should have been even further apart. So I am not quite sure what was suppose to happen.

And to use the 2009 example Both Greece and Turkey were hot favorites the whole contest and ending up in 11th place as a favorite is actually a dissapointing outcome if you ask me.
As I mentioned before, everyone has the right to an opinion. It's okay to be for or against juries/televotes but these are opinions. We need to seperate opinions from facts cause it's easy to get those two things mixed up.

I like the fact that the results are less predictable with a 50/50 system and while I in general agree with the jury votes over the televote, there are always suprises and things I disagree with. For example I loved Finland last year and thought the juries would, too. Turned out they were not having any of that.

While I wasn't a big fan of the old juries (pre 1998/1999) EBU put a lot of effort and guidelines in place to make the voting as fair as possible. Will it ever be 100% fair? Of course not, music is subjective and jury members are human, too. But based on the limited data we have available do I believe they are being efficient? I'd say yes

 

[A-lister]

@ Matt

The Greece/Turkey example was to show that juries do NOT reduce diaspora voting as some assume, whether these votes were fairly given or not by the juries are offcourse subjective.

@ Fallen Angel

Sorry, you don't have to teach me what a debate is, you are the last person really to do so as you seem to think a debate is something where you show disrespect and act all over rude. That is not a legitimate debate.

When did I write people were jumping on me when they do not agree? Try to write something with respect and you might have gotten another reaction from the get-go, you could learn a thing or two about good discussion from Matt.

Also don't make such subjective things as music or view on Eurovision sound like facts. I can just speak for my own opinion and that's it.

So stop with your provocations and start discussing in a respectful tone, otherwise don't bother with me atleast.

 

[FallenAngelII]

@Matt: Agreed fully 100%. Those a my views exactly. Also, far too often people seem to think that unless the juries agree with them and their views, they are wrong and not doing their jobs.
@A-Lister: Respect needs to be earned. I start out neutral with everbody. But if they choose themselves unworthy of respect, I do not give them any.

 

[A-lister]

@A-Lister: Respect needs to be earned. I start out neutral with everbody. But if they choose themselves unworthy of respect, I do not give them any.

Haha and I did what exactly to you to earn your "disrespect"?

Anyways I agree, respect needs to be earned, if one acts disrespectful don't expect respect back.

But it's childish to disrespect someone just based on that person's opinion, and here you have the answer why I have no interest discussing things further with you.

Anyways I don't need to "earn your respect". You should listen to yourself, are you for real? People "need to earn your respect" in a music discussion forum? Well you just proved you're a total waste.

Stop provoking me with any more of those answers thank you. You are out to provoke as you can't take it on PM, it's very obvious.

 

[A-lister]

@Matt: Agreed fully 100%. Those a my views exactly. Also, far too often people seem to think that unless the juries agree with them and their views, they are wrong and not doing their jobs.

And they are right when they agree with you How interesting and convenient.

Once again you failed to understand one simple thing: Music IS and always will be subjective, no matter if it's juries voting or not. Opinions on juries votes (for or against) will always be subjective and sorry mate, it's the same for you in this case aswell, although you are unwilling to admit that your opinion is no fact.

 

[FallenAngelII]

On-topic:
What do people think of a true 50/50? The juries and the televote get one set of points 1-8, 10, 12) each.

Anyways I agree, respect needs to be earned, if one acts disrespectful don't expect respect back.

Anyways I don't need to "earn your respect".

Yeah... OK then.

You are out to provoke as you can't take it on PM.

So taking it to PMs would be somehow less provoking? Also, if you wish to do so so vehemently, you do it.

And they are right when they agree with you How interesting and convenient.

I never sad that.

Once again you failed to understand one simple thing: Music IS and always will be subjective, no matter if it's juries voting or not. Opinions on juries votes (for or against) will always be subjective and sorry mate, it's the same for you in this case aswell, although you are unwilling to admit that your opinion is no fact.

I never argued differently.

 

[A-lister]

On-topic:
So taking it to PMs would be somehow less provoking? Also, if you wish to do so so vehemently, you do it.

Because firstly arguing in here is just silly and off-topic.

Secondly why should I? It's clearly you who had a problem with me from the start and you continue to show it on and on again.

 

[lucian-crusher]

On-topic:
What do people think of a true 50/50? The juries and the televote get one set of points 1-8, 10, 12) each.

I agree on that!

 

[A-lister]

I agree on that!

Me too, atleast it would be more transparent although results would be the same. A split screen with one side for the juries votes and the other half for televotes and then mixing them up in a final screen.

Also the juries should vote in the same evening as televotes, I don't like the current system with voting during dress rehearsal.

 

[FallenAngelII]

Me too, atleast it would be more transparent although results would be the same. A split screen with one side for the juries votes and the other half for televotes and then mixing them up in a final screen.

No... the would be no mixing.

 

[A-lister]

No... the would be no mixing.

Well there would be otherwise how would you have a final result? We can't have two results with maybe two different winners. In every system there's mixing (like the Swedish one).

 

[FallenAngelII]

I misunderstood hat you said as the scores being mixed into a single set of 1-8, 10 and 12. Yes, I'm proposing a system similar that of the Swedish national final.

 

[A-lister]

I misunderstood hat you said as the scores being mixed into a single set of 1-8, 10 and 12. Yes, I'm proposing a system similar that of the Swedish national final.

No I meant a split screen where viewers can see juries and televotes divided and then a merged one. But this would have to be shown in the same time more or less otherwise we would have two hour voting.

 

[evilperson]

Apparently the EBU is planning on splitting the televote and jury points.

Something is definitely changing (or not) which is why the order for the voting has yet to be announced.