The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

DDO should employ features similar to Facebook 'Likes'

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 460 times Debate No: 56711
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Short and sweet!
- 1000 characters
- Try not to be verbose
- 2 rounds only

My contention is the following:
DDO is becoming an important community for social commentary. As such, I am of the opinion that a slight increase in social media appropriation is desirable. What I want to see:

- A function similar to Facebook 'Likes' for debate arguments, perhaps framed as an "I Support This" button to express to debaters how their argument is being taken
- A comment section for debate arguments
- Comments can receive Likes (or "I Support This", etc).

Potential problems obviously include:
- Weak debaters being assisted by the community and not debating for themselves, although this could actually be a good thing.
- Vitriol is more likely to arise in the heat of debates.

That being said, perhaps the functions could be turned off by the creator of the debate, and also members can currently post in the comments section anyway, this would just be more in-line.

Think I'm wrong? Better ideas?


DDO should not employ a feature similar to Facebook's "like" button. Contrary to what my opponent stated, DDO is not a social media site, nor is it for "social" commentary, it is a site for intelligent discussion or today's issues. Although it has a few benefits, the harms greatly outweigh them. For one, judges might be persuaded to vote with who has more likes even though their opponent has a better argument. Also, all this would end up becoming is who supports what. That is what the big issues are for. It would add confusion to the site, and all for what? a feature that already exists. Instead we could have pre-made debates on all of the big issues, with more fluid votes that feature some tie in with your actual opinion, and voting before the end (such as per round or continuous). Of course these could not count toward users's ranking, or only votes after the end count.

I have shown why I think your wrong, and what my counter proposal is, now onto you.
Debate Round No. 1


To address your position that DDO is not a social media site, I refer you to the Tufts University definition: "Social media refers to the means of interactions among people in which they create, share, and/or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks."(1) By definition, I assert that DDO is a social media platform. As you said, "it is a site for[...]today's issues." Well, certainly I agree. And, in fact, I would call this social commentary, despite your objection to the term: "Social commentary is the act of using rhetorical means to provide commentary on issues in a society."(2)

The DDO community is intelligent enough to vote on merit.

Given that DDO is a public social network for all to share their opinions, I believe that the only way to guarantee a free, democratic exchange of ideas is to permit other members to contribute through open dialogue.

(1) []
(2) []


Ok, I concede the definitions. However, that does not help you, as we are debating wether there should be "likes" or not, not wether there should be comments. DDO already has comments. This "open dialogue" you mentioned has nothing to do with comments, so everything you just said doesn't matter. Although you debated very well, you just debated the wrong topic, and thus I should win. Because there are more harms then benefits, DDO should not have a system similar to likes.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Samreay 2 years ago
This was a VERY close vote on arguments by the way. I would have liked Pro to go into the usefulness of likes on comment and arguments more, and Con would probably have won arguments if they but had cited any previous example of voter bias increasing with likes. A good example for them to use may have been reddit, and their addition of vote obscuring for an initial time after posting to stop people bandwagoning.
Posted by InnovativeEphemera 2 years ago
I would like to add that I am aware that certain functions (for example, in Polls), comments and likes already exists. This debate is expressly about Debates.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Samreay 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: First off, conduct, spelling, grammar, great from both sides, so tied there. As to sources, given that Pro managed to get a concession from Con by use of citation, would have to give it to Pro. As to arguments, well, Likes is an interesting notion. Con's main argument was that likes may bias voting. That does not seem like a strong argument, given that inspection of the most popular debates on this site show that (all in all) people tend to vote for the side they agree with regardless of argumentative support (ie, the bias already exists, so adding likes has not been shown to introduce the problem). I agree that Pro's response (open debate) was not immediately relevant in the second round, but I think that Pro's idea of allowing per round and per comment likes to have merit, in that (I believe this is what Pro was getting at with the open debate) people can now have basic feedback on if their comment was insightful, and per argument feedback to know which argument was most powerful.