The Instigator
hmaxim
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Hylian_3000
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Change.org Should Have a Way to See the Other Side of the Argument

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/13/2014 Category: Technology
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 621 times Debate No: 65060
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

hmaxim

Pro

I used to be a large supporter of change.org when it first started up, but recently it has become a slew of one-sided stories. In most of them, if the other side of the argument could be viewed, most people would have enough knowledge to know not to support that petition. Do we want our citizens to become mindless drones which when they hear the words "animal cruelty" immediately throw their support into a cause? I think not. Good luck to my opponent, and I hope that this debate will prove interesting.
Hylian_3000

Con

First of all, I hope that this will be a great and interesting debate, good luck!

We need to recognize that Change.org is a petition site, not a debate site. This is where people go to support causes that they should already know about and have basic knowledge about. There will be people who browse the petitions and support anything that looks "bad", this is unavoidable due to Change.org being a public site on the Internet. However people who use the site seriously would know about the topic and would support the cause because they strongly believe in it. People who want to find the other side of the story can always search the topic and read about it.
Debate Round No. 1
hmaxim

Pro

First of all, thank you for accepting the debate. Second, I beg to disagree. Although Change.org is a petition site, it is often the only source of information on whatever topic is being petitioned. For instance, the reason I started this petition was for a story about a man serving life for robbery (https://www.change.org...). Sure, it's a heartwarming story, and I somewhat agree with it, but to be sure that I want to put my name on it, I'd have to see what other people are saying on the subject.
Another argument con made is that people already know and care about the topic. However, almost all petitions are about events that not many people know about. How could they already know about the topic if it does not occur nationally?
Finally, con said that people can always search the topic and read about it. Sure, you could spend five minutes on google and look up whatever topic it was and you will probably find some okay sources. But wouldn't it be easier just to click the "sign" button?
Our voters need to be educated about the topic they are voting on. Change.org does not offer a way to do that. That is why I believe that Change.org should have a system to show the other side of the argument. Thank you con and thank you voters.
Hylian_3000

Con

Yes it's easier to just click the "sign" button, it's also easier to vote on this site without reading the debate. People who use the site seriously probably read the description for the petitions, and think if they should sign the petition or not. If you look at the "recent" tab in the browse section, a lot of the petitions concerning things people haven't heard about don't get as much signatures. These petitions don't concern real world events and problems and don't have a good description. I've read the story you had in your argument and it is heartwarming. The person who wrote it spent a great deal of time to describe the situation and why you should sign the petition. Can you imagine how many signatures they would get if they just wrote, "My husband's in jail, please help him get out." Stories that have to do or have a link to current events are usually the ones that get signatures, and the ones that don't but get lots of signatures have great causes and a great description. There is no reason to have a way to see the other side on Change.org, would you need to see the other side for the petitions for great causes? They probably describe the other side a bit. What about those other causes, the ones that people don't put a second thought into? Do they (or change.org) need to put in the time and effort to find someone to write the other side? Not just for the small petitions but for the big ones too. A lot of the big ones have to do with changing big organizations or businesses. Do the really need to spend a great deal of time trying to contact them and have them write something online?

I believe that there is no reason to have a way to see the other side, change.org would see a significant decrease in petitions because in order to get petitions started they need to have someone else write the other side. It's just too much work for your average person, and it really won't make a difference in the end anyway. Thanks for the debate, pro, and thanks voters.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Libertatis 2 years ago
Libertatis
can you explain your topic more
No votes have been placed for this debate.