DDO should employ features similar to Facebook 'Likes'
Debate Rounds (2)
- 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?
I have shown why I think your wrong, and what my counter proposal is, now onto you.
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 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Samreay 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||5||0|
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.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.