The Instigator
spiph23
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
askbob
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Debate.org shouldn't require 3 debates to vote

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 5 votes the winner is...
askbob
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/25/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 869 times Debate No: 17264
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (5)
Votes (5)

 

spiph23

Pro

By requiring 3 debates to vote, individuals who like to read, comment, and vote on debates have to resort to participating in meaningless debates to gain the privilege of voting. Unfortunately, this results in fewer participants willing to engage at this site. By lowering or eliminating the 3 debates to vote, debate.org will increase the number of individuals participating.
askbob

Con

Why would Debate.org want individuals who are not here to debate? What makes you think you are qualified to judge my debate if you've never debated before on this site. If you aren't willing to put the effort into debating why would I logically expect you to put the effort to reading my debate and judge it unbiasedly? You won't, you'll simply vote on it as if it was an opinion poll and not by the merits of the debate.

Debate.org is looking for quality, not quantity. We're happy that individuals who have no interest in debating do not join this site or vote on others debates. These are debates not opinion polls. Those who aren't here to debate and engage in intellectual discussion should not have the ability to vote.

Those who create meaningless debates such as this one to bypass this system will be banned and have their votes deleted. I am also reporting this debate so it is permanently deleted. I urge voters not to vote on it and to report it in kind.
Debate Round No. 1
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
Quantity does not equal quality.
Posted by wjmelements 5 years ago
wjmelements
I also disagree with the 3 debate requirement. It creates spam debates. Requiring 2 wins is more appropriate.
Posted by askbob 5 years ago
askbob
Cliff, your bias is showing
Posted by askbob 5 years ago
askbob
There are forums for opinions.
Posted by shooterboss 5 years ago
shooterboss
I agree with Con, but I do not think this debate should be deleted or reported. Pro was expressing an opinion, and he has the right to do so.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
spiph23askbobTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Looking at the argument for Con it is hypocritical as askbob constantly rants about the importance of mafia on DDO. However this isn't relevant to the argument at hand. askbob does not in way affirm a negation of loss of participants is positive beyond he does not think these people are worthwhile. Further to this there is again TOS violation of open harassment of members. I can not imagine how any young members would see this as a welcoming environment.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
spiph23askbobTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made it clear that he only posted this debate to get a debate towards earning voting rights. That's bad conduct. Con argued successfully that debate.org is intended for people who debate.
Vote Placed by shooterboss 5 years ago
shooterboss
spiph23askbobTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I still agree with Con. The three debates rule ensures quality for the votes of a debate. However, it is unnecessary to report this particular debate. Con's threats to remove this debate, a topic which Pro created, costed him one point, but Con still wins.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
spiph23askbobTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The "Quality vs. Quantity" argument was effective, and unrefuted.
Vote Placed by GMDebater 5 years ago
GMDebater
spiph23askbobTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Don't have a one round debate. Conduct: Noone was rude and defflamed each other Grammar: Good s/g all what I can see Arguments: Because this was a one round debate, cons arguments were not refuted. Noone used sources.