Use this page to request and vote on new features for the site. You can thumbs-up and thumbs-down features to express your support or disapproval, and add your own feature suggestions. You can also comment on features and track their current development status. Click on a feature title to expand.
Show:
Sort:
-
+9
+
💬 2
Improve mobile styles further
Enhancement
Description:
Ensure that the mobile version of the site is as good looking as the non-mobile. Test and implement additional responsive styles.
brandon.the.debater Well, for me it does. Also, why would you debate on your phone a lot. I just use my phone to check my updates, nothing else. Posted 2016-12-17 20:03:43
-
+9
+
💬 1
End Cross-Examination Early
Enhancement
Description:
Button to click when you have asked all the questions you wish to ask. If BOTH debaters click it, then the CX round has ended.
Bi0Hazard @admin
How would the ELO be added in this? A split?
Would it be like someone having a win ratio of %60, a loss ration of %30, and a draw ration of %10. Posted 2016-09-05 14:26:44
admin Usually a draw is an elo value of 0.5, a win of 1 and a loss of 0. So like, drawing with a weaker opponent is bad but half as bad as losing. Drawing with a stronger opponent is good but half as good as winning.
BTW I'm not actually a fan of this suggestion for other reasons. Put it here because heaps of people asked me for it.Posted 2016-09-05 17:05:19
admin Sorry forgot to tag @@Black Flag@@Posted 2016-09-05 17:05:44
Kilk1 I have a question. How is the ELO affected now when people share the same amount of points after a debate? When I've seen debates, it's seemed liked one person wins and another loses. If this is true, I'm definitely in favor of draws.Posted 2017-03-06 03:11:09
Povski Also, regarding judging, there needs to be a separate, third option "draw" for which to vote. And the result is settled just as before - whichever has more points. So it can be that either pro win, con win, or draw has more points and the debate concludes accordingly.
Otherwise, we have to vote in favor of a side with which we dont agree just to balance things out.Posted 2017-06-20 08:39:35
admin @Povski To be fair though, judges are supposed to be impartial. Voting against your convictions is pretty normal. Heck I gave a judgment against a team the other week in RL because they forgot to convince me democracy was good.Posted 2017-06-20 12:03:44
Collaborative realtime HTML editing in team debates
Enhancement
Description:
Collaborative realtime editing is currently only enabled for text debates. Come up with a script that enables syncing of multiple users for the HTML editor as well.
Ab_M I'd also like to see flowing as an option for all debates! You could create a little spreadsheet that sits next to the debate as you read. Have an "add Pro argument" and an "add Con argument" button off to the side, and each argument could have an "add response" button. Maybe judges could have the option to make their flowsheets from the rounds public?Posted 2016-04-08 14:19:58
-
+7
+
💬 0
Allow foreign language groups
Social Feature
Description:
Use the Bing API to translate foreign language forum posts in groups if demand requires. Maintain an active cache to avoid too many requests.
Description:
When a user signs up for a team debate and they are in multiple teams, provide an option to select which of those teams they wish to debate with.
Description:
Enable shoutbox at-tagging, with a new notification setting, and show the context of the conversation (previous 10 posts) in the email notification (if one is sent). This should apply to the main forum and to groups.
Description:
Admin should implement a page that outlines things he could not afford and how much fundraising he would need from the community to implement those features. Examples include live debating server, a professional logo design, advertisements, ecetera
admin This is not a bug. This is a social feature.Posted 2015-05-30 07:05:15
-
+4
+
💬 0
Blitz Debates
Debate Feature
Description:
New established debating category along with quick debates, individual debates, and team debates. Required a minimum prep time of a week and rounds are at a maximum of 30 minutes. First proposed by Tophatdoc
Description:
Further prevent accidental duplicate submission of content such as comments or posts. Possibly a combination of the post-process-get redirect system and some kind of unique token system.
Blackflag As is I don't like it, but you can follow the wikia method and allow the easy creation of a badge. Better, but I still don't like itPosted 2015-07-05 22:57:54
Add flag icons on profiles for all listed locations
Enhancement
Description:
A large # of countries don't have flag icons. The actual icon is pretty easy to make, I don't know if the icons were made manually or copied.
Description:
Increase the ability to restrict who can accept one of your debates, by allowing tighter elo controls and introducing filters for number of debates, number of wins etc.
Description:
You'd be able to start a debate within a group, open only to group members, and with the option to make it publicly visible or visible only to group members
Description:
Allow members with an open debate challenge to extend that challenge, resetting the 3-day countdown timer. Optionally provide a notification when a challenge is about to expire.
Description:
Encourage judging by showing how much time is still required to finish reading the debate. Some variant of readremaining.js would be ideal - needs to take into account the fact edeb8 users tend to juggle tasks sometimes even while judging.
Blackflag I assumed that people read at different speedsPosted 2015-05-30 16:28:09
admin the beauty of readremaining.js and similar systems is that they account for that - they use scrollbar position etc to figure out what part you're most likely reading and calculate your likely reading speed accordingly. It tends to work very well if you have, like, 5+ pages of content to read through, as you do with many longer debates.Posted 2015-05-30 16:49:10
Blackflag I guess I wouldn't be opposed to it then. It's seems like you would have to spend a lot of time making the right specifications on the file for something we do not need that muchPosted 2015-05-30 20:08:18
-
+3
+
💬 0
Shorter optional round times
Debate Feature
Description:
In case somebody wants to have a rapid-fire debate with only a few minutes to post each side. Would probably be best suited to quick debates.
admin Throw me some suggestions on where I should put it. My initial thought on seeing this request was the site footer but it's getting kinda full-looking there. Other ideas?Posted 2015-05-31 03:55:29
admin Dammit, I got too many notifications when I changed this feature status. Oh well, investigating bug again.Posted 2015-05-31 08:31:55
nzlockie Leave the thread pointing to it sticky in the forum and then also update the site map to include it and some of the other pages. Like the stats page and the wodc2015 page.Posted 2015-05-31 09:37:08
-
+3
+
💬 0
Include a new button on feature requests
Other Feature
Description:
A button titled 'create thread' on feature requests, quickly taking the user to the thread creation box, with the name of the feature request and its description placed into the title and text boxes.
Description:
Will allow email messages generated by the site to be connected to most popular calendar apps (Windows Calendar, Google Calendar, iCal etc), meaning you'll be able to see something like "Debate round due" in your calendar automatically if you wish.
Description:
I want to be able to build my group with people from outside this platform. Ultimately building the number of users of the site over all. There are many people using Youtube to debate issues in the comment section. I think it would be cool to be able to post a link that can invite people directly into my group using that link. Currently, I can only invite other edeb8 users.
Description:
The ability to invite other edeb8 members directly into a tournament, and optionally to make tournaments "by invitation only" like groups can be
Description:
Since, PUFO and LD involve topics that are shared by the whole community per month, maybe at the near of each month a topic is voted on. Then this topic is debated by people that want to. For example, I go to the debate tab, make a new debate, and click, make LD, and then the topic will be the LD topic, and all will be ready!
admin Maybe this could be a monthly community poll. And the create debate page would just show "this month's featured topic is: _____" or something like that.Posted 2016-12-17 20:11:13
admin All character counts are now read directly from the server, avoiding the client-side count.Posted 2015-06-03 07:01:58
-
+2
+
💬 2
Pop up chat option
Social Feature
Description:
Rather than having all chats confined to small boxes in the corner, allow users to pop up the chat and see it in a larger, more readable size.
Description:
Having multiple tabs open causes the chat to make a sound effect in ALL tabs, rather than just the active one. If not active tab is open, only the first tab to receive the message should play a sound.
Optional bypass for limits to team debate membership for debates
Enhancement
Description:
Allow debate creators to choose to bypass the check on how many members a team has when creating a team debate. This would allow, say, a 1-person team to create a 3-round debate.
when is this going to be implemented? I want to start doing more team debates, but there are too few members and I hate having to be limited to 2 rounds. Posted 2015-08-24 14:05:13
-
+2
+
💬 0
Spell checker being slow
Bug
Description:
Speed up the spellchecker and provide additional notifications rather than just a "working" animation.
admin Is this a duplicate of "Allow account deactivation"? Might be better to upvote that one instead of submitting an entirely new request.Posted 2015-06-04 04:59:45
-
+2
+
💬 0
Secret CX identifier
Enhancement
Description:
When a debate is in progress where the sides are "hidden" the CX rounds can be hard to follow.
This enhancement would use colour or some other identifier to show which side was speaking during CX.
For example, PRO might be Blue, CON might be red.
Description:
when both sides are hidden, CX rounds become almost impossible to follow.
I suggest doing something like automatically listing them as PRO or CON, or using color to differentiate them.
Description:
If neither Pro nor Con has posted an argument, but all rounds have been forfeited, then there has been no debate so nobody should get any credit after. Instead, we also skip judging because why would anybody waste their time voting on this?
Also, maybe we can mark these "attempts to a debate" with (empty/null/something similar) before the title of the debate so we can save time when browsing, for example, in the "related" tab.
admin This already exists @StagPosted 2015-05-30 06:52:32
Blackflag First completed request, lolPosted 2015-05-30 16:10:10
-
+1
+
💬 2
Prevent site "buttons" from being copied to debate arguments
Bug
Description:
See this debate for example: http://www.edeb8.com/debate/secret-topic-34/
From personal experience I know that some of the buttons can have negative effects when they are pushed during a time when they are not supposed too. One example would be a sound file button. In the past my computer has been repeadetly closed down after pressing a sound file button which I accidentally copied to arguments
In the example I posted, everytime I would try to delete the buttons text, it reappeared afterwards.
Changing Criteria for Adding Debates to the Judging Tab
Enhancement
Description:
This could be a bug. Debates that just ended with no judgements are not on the judging tab. Debates with a certain amount of judgements are taken off the judging tab.
This proposal is to make all debates still in the judging period appear in the judging tab
admin FYI, the ONLY reason why a debate should not be on the judging tab is because you're not eligible to judge it for some reason currently.Posted 2015-05-30 16:45:12
Blackflag Wow, that makes me feel insanely dumb. I guess you can mark it as complete then, or maybe we can modify it so it can include debates which we have ourselves done?Posted 2015-05-31 02:14:30
admin New setting created for this if you want to include all debates in the judging phase.Posted 2015-05-31 03:20:51
Blackflag I can't find it Posted 2015-05-31 03:37:23
admin @Stag - Display tab, right at the bottomPosted 2015-06-03 07:03:00
admin Also tag me if you want a response.Posted 2015-06-03 07:03:23
-
+1
+
💬 3
Mandatory RFDs for Votes
Enhancement
Description:
I would suggest there be mandatory RFDs and a volunteer can be a voting moderator for the site, to remove reported votes, with the same system as Debate.org. Despite claims to the contrary, majority of 1-point votes *are* vote-bombs.
ColeTrain This is a very good idea. Without an RFD, you can't tell if they are vote bombing or not.Posted 2015-08-31 09:20:17
Blackflag As if this site couldn't get worst...Posted 2015-09-30 06:10:26
admin To be clear: the intention here is to enable optional minimum-3-point decisions. It is not to add a vote moderator etc. This option would be discouraged for new users by not including it in auto-generated topics and putting it with the advanced options. However, people did vote for this. Heck, I opposed it. But whatever.Posted 2015-09-30 06:14:06
-
+1
+
💬 0
After posting on forums, redirect users to their post
Enhancement
Description:
Show people the post they just made after posting
Description:
Debaters who have elected to stay hidden until the completion of their debate, may still be visible by using the "Debate/Show All" function.
Description:
Add the ability for a tournament creator or a participant to "drop out" of a tournament mid-tournament, or for a tournament creator to add in another participant for the next round. This would only be applicable to Swiss tournaments.
Description:
Next to the ELO, there would be a trophy emoji with a number of debates won next to it. Allowing people to guess experience level. Additionally, when somebody wins, highlight the icon in yellow, and in the debate, add a trophy next to the persons name, and allow them to make a short thank you speech.
Description:
Currently, when someone chooses "four positions", it's not really four positions. It's a British Parliamentary Debate, which is really just four people debating two positions, yet there's only one winner.
What I would like to see is a debate with these four positions:
(Almost) Always Pro
Most of the time Pro
Most of the time Con
(Almost) Always Con
Alternatively, people could type in their own positions. For example:
Resolution: Blue is the best color
User #1: Pro
User #2: Con, red is
User #3: Con, yellow is
User #4: Con, green is
We could have an actual four position debate that way.
Description:
Allow status updates on profiles to sync with Facebook and Twitter. This would mean:
> Reading new status updates from connected platforms and posting them to profiles
> When a status update is posted on edeb8, post it to connected platforms as well
> Display links to connected platforms on the profile page
Description:
This causes the caret to move back to the start of the editor, and occasionally mess up spacing within the pasted text / surrounding whitespace.
Description:
Will speed up certain pages that send emails - for example, when posting a comment on a debate or making a feature request - that do not require the notification to be emailed right that second.
Description:
Allow teams to have their own backgrounds, rich descriptions etc in the same way that groups do. Also provide teams with a private shoutbox and forum for team members, like groups have. In general it feels like teams have been a bit neglected in terms of social features!
Description:
Used to make a tournament in which there is a hidden feature, where only people invited are allowed, such as like inviting friends only to the debate tournament. Hidden until tournament starts
admin Interesting idea. Feasible as it would be similar to private groups.
My only possible concern is - would this really help promote more interest in tournaments?Posted 2016-12-17 19:23:10
brandon.the.debater Well, I would use this myself as an invite only to like Finals to a tournament in which the top whatever get invited to the tournament, which would allow people to fight to get into that
Posted 2016-12-17 19:44:37
admin Can't they just, y'know, send a challenge to each other?Posted 2016-12-17 20:13:34
brandon.the.debater Ya, but it would be easier to handle with a tournament. Plus, if you just want to challenge a specific group of people. Maybe just people in your private group. Posted 2016-12-17 20:15:34
admin Perhaps this should be merged with the "group debates" suggestion then. I'll consider it.Posted 2016-12-17 20:22:11
-
+0
+
💬 1
Timed CX
Enhancement
Description:
Allow CX period to be adjustable to the user in order for them to create less or more time for questioning. For example the minimum maybe 1 hour and the max 5 days
admin This already exists. Marking as complete.Posted 2016-12-17 20:05:16
-
+0
+
💬 3
Tournament
Bug
Description:
Call the winner a champion. Automatically, make a group for all the people in the debate so it is easier to make announcements. Maybe have a place to insert the topic into the rounds place. Maybe not create rounds until told to. For example, you start the tournament, and you wait a day until you click the button create rounds, then the people are matched up. You get to choose the topic and the matchings, so the debate is auto-created and easy. Allow rules to be listed in a tab. Maybe have a hide debaters so far. Maybe not show points or results at all during the tournament, sometimes that happens.
admin Kinda hard not to show results when debates are public information, right?Posted 2016-12-17 20:16:12
brandon.the.debater True, but maybe the number of wins and points on standings, because even though they may know the result by looking at the debate itself, you never know. Posted 2016-12-17 20:18:12
admin Meh, backtabbing is much easier when people can look back on all the debates. In RL I've seen some pretty darn impressive backtabbing spreadsheets.Posted 2016-12-17 20:23:41
-
+0
+
💬 1
Separate the "Features & Bugs" page.
Enhancement
Description:
Separate "features & bugs" page in to two separate pages, one for Bugs, and one for features.
admin Waiting for response from DDO moderator.Posted 2015-05-30 04:23:59
nzlockie What stops them doing this already in the "Biography" section?Posted 2015-05-30 10:47:55
admin @nzlockie - I guess people can write anything on their biography. What makes this different is that it would be verified automatically. And would stroke certain people's ego in so doing.Posted 2015-05-30 11:33:32
Blackflag Ego stroking ain't a good thing Posted 2015-05-30 20:01:32
Mharman oh, please. down voting This is just Edeb8ers way of trying to say that's there' superior.Posted 2017-10-17 06:34:19
-
-1
+
💬 0
Reducing the size of the friend activity feed
Bug
Description:
Possibilities include boxing it and adding a scroll down bar and converting it to a profile tab.
Description:
Group threads could be either public or private, so that those of us who would rather read and glean from group conversations can do so without identifying as a part of the group
Description:
It has virtually no use anyway to turn this feature off. It's on by default and everyone leaves it that way because turning it off makes the site harder to use. Just like pagination became mandatory for browsing threads, it should also be mandatory for subforums.
In addition, turning it off slows down browsing subforums by close to 1000%. And that figure will get worse over time.
Description:
When creating the debate, the creator will create 3 different topics, and upon selection of the contender, the topic will be randomly selected. This would allow for like a customized "secret topic" that will help the users become flexible to selecting a topic.
Description:
Similar to secret topic, only the prep-time and everything else is also prepared. Then, there will be points of information, where the person would highlight what they want to argue against/refute then write out a question, and the other person responds.
Description:
5 people in a debate round, go up one by one, and there is a PO, which overrules everything, and chooses who goes next and what side to put them on. The bill is presented with prep time of one day, and they post what they want to say. CX happens, with actual bids, so for example, I want to ask a question, I press ask button, then PO selects me, I write the question, then they respond. Also, priority is based on ELO
Description:
In a debate that hides participants until after judging, this feature would allow the participants to remind or keep up with judges via a personally typed message, all without compromising the ability to be anonymous.
Kilk1 To prevent potential scheming in private between one participant and the judges, perhaps these messages could be posted on a forum-like page, viewable by both of the participants and the judges.Posted 2017-03-06 03:27:36
-
-2
+
💬 0
Closing chat in one tab should close in all
Enhancement
Description:
Prevent users having to cycle through every open edeb8 tab just to close a chat.
admin Quoting Stag on the forums: "It would be a good idea if some of the sites social features were limited until members had finished one debate. The ones which I think should be limited are site forums excluding the Edeb8 subforum and the community subforum, and groups. The shoutbox and chat should still be available."Posted 2015-05-30 06:57:42
Blackflag @NZlockie - When are you available for a challenge on this topic?Posted 2015-05-30 16:18:41
nzlockie @Stag you want me to debate this topic? Which side, presumably con?
Well it's be a short debate probably, so anytime I guess. Posted 2015-05-30 16:22:23
Blackflag @NZlockie I assumed you downvoted it. Yeah, this is my new campaign, so best to debate itPosted 2015-05-30 16:23:37
nzlockie I don't think it was me. I remember reading it, but I don't feel particularly strongly either way.
I generally favour the status quo so I suppose I might have clicked it.
I could probably run Avon case for this, although I can't promise it'll be the strongest.Posted 2015-05-30 16:51:15
admin @Stag - I, on the other hand, am available for challenge as soon as our current debate finishes, assuming no forfeits Posted 2015-05-30 17:29:04
-
-2
+
💬 0
New Stickied Threads
Enhancement
Description:
One would be the Edeb8 issues forum post and the other should be the live debates birthday forum post
Change the over 24 hours green debate highlight to a blue highlighter
Enhancement
Description:
This isn't just some useless change. Green and Red do no not go well together. On several occasions I haven't been able to pick out my under 24 hour debates because they were wedged between two extremely light greens. A bolder highlight around the debate topic would make it easier to distinguish between over 24 hour and under 24 hour debates.
Changing participation in a round for 4 person debates
Debate Feature
Description:
Currently a round counts as OG/OO and they would debate consecutively the number of rounds that has been set for the debate then the rounds would be CG/CO and they would debate consecutively the number of rounds. I propose each round would instead be OG/OO/CG/CO and then CX (if the feature is selected) and then this would be repeated for the number of rounds selected.
Description:
Allows edeb8 members to fill in forfeited rounds before a debate goes into judging. If the debate wins, they recieve a portion of ELO if the debate wins, and if the debate loses then they will consequently lose a portion of ego.
Bi0Hazard No way, got downvoted even though it is such a great idea. Posted 2016-09-05 14:27:37
-
-2
+
💬 0
Hide rounds option.
Debate Feature
Description:
We should have the option to hide our round until both rounds have been posted in order to provide an equal rebuttal time. The following structure is problematic:
Round 1: Arguments by Pro and Con.
Round 2: Rebuttals by Pro and Con.
This is because when Pro posts his arguments Con now has x amount of time to post their arguments, then an additional x amount of time to construct rebuttals to pro's first round whilst Pro is constructing their rebuttals and then finally a third x amount of time to post their rebuttals. This gives Con 3 times as long to post their rebuttals to Pro's case. Whereas for Pro, they have to refute Con's case immediately after it's been posted (unless there's a cross examination period).
This new feature would mean that pro's round 1 would only be visible to pro and con's round 1 would only be visible to con until the next round starts. This ensures a more equal amount of time available for both debaters.
Description:
To allow people to rebut easier in their refutations, an auto-quoting system will let them quote and snap their argument to it, along with providing the quote to be underlined in the debaters argument to show as refuted, allowing easier rebutting
admin POIs are currently allowed. It's not a tab, nor is it tournament ready, until live debates can be recorded and judged.
Why CX next to it? Can't people just do the CX live via video?Posted 2016-12-17 20:10:12
brandon.the.debater Like a specific place to do it. Maybe in a chat section. I haven't really tested it out yet. Posted 2016-12-17 20:17:04
brandon.the.debater Like a specific place to do it. Maybe in a chat section. I haven't really tested it out yet. Posted 2016-12-17 20:21:29
admin Currently there's a timer clock that shows who is meant to be speaking. For example CX times and such are labelled.Posted 2016-12-17 20:24:42
-
-2
+
💬 0
Possibility to take on a conceded debate.
Debate Feature
Description:
When somebody concedes (gives up) on a debate, instead of instantaneously endind it, we should allow time for someone else to join and argue from the position that made the concesion.
Description:
The website design makes navigation a bit difficult at first and it feels a bit outdated. I believe that the site could use a fresh new look.
admin This has been attempted several times before and has only led to disappointment for all involved. I've even gone so far as to attempt to hire others but the only ones willing to take on the job tried to turn the whole site into a blog-only site. So unless somebody comes along with a better design, I'm going to thumbs-down this as non-constructive.Posted 2016-07-29 14:20:47
-
-3
+
💬 0
Auto-Choosing
Debate Feature
Description:
Instead of waiting for a contender to the debate, a person who is active is chosen, and is to debate. Thus creating more involvement in debate, and more surprise and fun.
Description:
Would ban troll debates, rap battles, and other silly games that have no business on a debate site. Thought this was already banned but admin can be pretty vague.
Description:
For Edeb8 discussions on ELO, see these threads
http://www.edeb8.com/forum/EDEB8.com+Site/1148
http://www.edeb8.com/forum/EDEB8.com+Site/976