Debate.org Should Be More Democratic
Debate Rounds (4)
In this debate, I will argue that the debate.org community should be more democratic and free. I do not believe that the moderators and administrators to be fair at times. There are times when I truly criticize and oppose their actions.
The below structure will be utilized:
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening Arguments
Round 3: Closing Arguments and First Rebuttals
Round 4: Counter-Rebuttals and Closing Remarks
The rules are evident: Forfeiture will not be tolerated, sources will be cited, and proper grammar will be used.
There are multiple definitions of democracy, but we shall use the one below:
"of, relating to, or favoring democracy"
I look forward to this debate.
"Democracy." Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 09 Sept. 2014. <http://www.merriam-webster.com...;.
I originally joined debate.org in order to explore and develop my debating skills and to learn new things. However, as I continued on the site, I have come to care for the members. I welcome all new members with all my heart and it pains me to see some go. Yet, the moderators do certain things I and other members oppose. They do certain things I find illogical. For that reason, above all, I believe this community should be more democratic.
The President is elected by the members; I concede that is a democratic principle. Yet, the moderators - which there is a limited amount of - have too much power and sometimes misuse it. I do not believe they should simply remove members simply because that person has been reported or blocked. The moderator should provide multiple warnings to the member and only remove them when they have gone too far. I have seen members being removed within minutes of making a mistake. If they are new members, uneducated, or simply stupid, they should be given more chances and an opportunity to grow, develop, and change.
I believe members should have more input in the policies moderators and other officials establish. They should be given more voting powers. Instead of there only being a handful of moderators, there should be a few dozen. We cannot simply thrust our trust, concerns, and fears upon a handful of individuals; individuals that perhaps, only perhaps, are on the wrong side of certain issues.
Is my stance opinionated? I concede that is partially is. Yet, my opponent and the viewers must acknowledge that the moderators have a tendency to make errors. Errors are what make us human. We are not perfect. However, this commuity should be more democratic than it is right now.
I am writing this argument from a computer at school. Forgive me, but I must make it shorter than I originally intended.
"HOLD HARMLESS Juggle, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, AGENTS, EMPLOYEES,". When you are signing up for debate.org you are doing so agreeing to this.
Also many users on debate.org are making stupid and useless debates and are not penalized. Debates like
These users are making terrible debates and some not even being debates yet all can still use debate.org. If us as users have more power debate.org will descend into website of chaos and disorder.
For the sake of this website democracy shouldn't even be a thought.
WilliamsP forfeited this round.
- Democracy can only be used if this was a government
- Debate.org is not a government because in it's T.O.U you are agreeing that they can do nothing wrong and that they can do
whatever they want
- Users on debate.org are making terrible debates and some are not being debates.
- If we give these users the power to vote they will almost certainly not make the right decision and will "troll".
- If this happens debate.org will no longer be a place to debate and more a place to "troll"
This was more or less my opening arguments. If you would like more information and some proof please read my previous arguments.
I sincerely apologize for the forfeiture. Yet, I have many obligations in my private life and I cannot spend much time here on debate.org. My life is beginning to change; to evolve. Debate.org interferes with my schedule and obligations for school. I must prioritize getting an education and thrusting my life forward. For that reason, I have decided to close my debate.org account soon. It will not be today, but it will be within the next few days.
Forgive me for ruining the debate, but the facts are the facts; I cannot do this. I cannot spend time on this site when instead I could be studying or doing homework. It is time for a change.
Thank you for taking the time to debate this with me, but it seems I can no longer contribute. Voters, I urge you to take into consideration the predicament I am in and to please excuse my forfeiture.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 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:||1||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct for the forfeit. As to arguments, Con presented some arguments that Pro never responded to...Pro seems to have resigned, honestly.
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.