The Instigator
DATXDUDE
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
Tough
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points

Internet trolls serve a valuable function in society

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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/3/2015 Category: Funny
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 780 times Debate No: 79356
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (2)

 

DATXDUDE

Pro

Think about it....

We make the internet more interesting, and, in the end, everyone wins!
Tough

Con

Society is not just the Internet, where trolls are no more then censorship fighting anarchists disrupting any and all order to the Internet's "society". As for real-life society, trolls are no more than a nuisance for the news to write about getting arrested either for hacking or bullying someone to suicide and remaining unidentified.

Frankly, the only valuable role/function trolls serve to society is being a good thing for parents to point at and say "hey kids, never be this guy when you grow up".
Debate Round No. 1
DATXDUDE

Pro

Trolls just instigate people and act stupid online. You're thinking of hackers, hackers aren't trolls.
Tough

Con

I was being sarcastic in round 1 when I said:

Frankly, the only valuable role/function trolls serve to society is being a good thing for parents to point at and say "hey kids, never be this guy when you grow up".

Trolls have some attributes, such as bravery and resilience despite setbacks and opposition that are admirable despite their vast array of negative ones. thus this cannot possible be true.

In reality, trolls (even the non-hacker ones which Pro is focusing on supporting) play a non-valuable function in society to bring out the worst in all other roles/functions in society. This is not valuable is and is undeniably destructive. Provocation of aggressive behavior is not valuable in any way whatsoever for any society, Internet-based or real-life based.

By existing solely to instigate aggression and violent tendencies in other roles in society, trolls are making all other roles/functions not perform at their peak as they waste time and energy destroying what they previously contributed to society and the time they spend doing that could be spent bettering it, adding VALUE to it.

Et voila, victory is mine. I give autographs on Saturdays.
Debate Round No. 2
DATXDUDE

Pro

Trolls DO serve a valuable function in society. They know how to mess with people who ARE bullies. Ever heard of the youtuber Lt.LickMe? Trolls also provide entertainment, and the people who respond to them get a good laugh at the end too (as long as the trolls aren't TOO malicious or the person who got trolled isn't butthurt). Think of trolling as comedy, or as a prank. Trollers can be funny if the troll is executed correctly.
Tough

Con

They deal with bullies? You mean they deal with themselves?

Trolls are the bullies and exist solely to bring out the worst in everyone else. This is not valuable at all.

Et voila.

Sure, some trolls who do not troll well enough are kind people who are only slightly irritating. They can be valuable because they suck at trolling well enough to truly get at people's pain or anger emotion receptors.
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: tajshar2k/ Mod action: Removed<

4 points to Con (S&G, Arguments). So, Pro never really proved how trolls were actually useful. He does give examples of what he think it does, but I don't believe he gave enough evidence to prove his BOP. Con does provide some reasons a to why trolls are bad, so I give him arguments. Spelling by pro was horrible, so that goes to Con.

[*Reason for removal*] While the arguments explanation is sufficient, the S&G point doesn't appear to have any clear support within the debate. I have trouble finding much in the way of spelling mistakes in Pro's argument, and certainly not so many as to warrant this point allocation.
************************************************************************
Posted by Tough 2 years ago
Tough
ColeTrain stop voting in debates, period.
Posted by DATXDUDE 2 years ago
DATXDUDE
Iannan stop voting on my debates.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
I didn't. I just respond to the reports.
Posted by DATXDUDE 2 years ago
DATXDUDE
No im just joking. Why did you report the vote though?
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
I didn't make any judgment of your debate, so I'm confused as to why you're attacking me.
Posted by DATXDUDE 2 years ago
DATXDUDE
screw you whiteflame. I worked my a'ss of to win this debate.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: ColeTrain// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Con wasn't able to prove that trolls don't serve as a valuable function to society. In the first round, he mentioned that, at least, trolls serve as a lesson. If trolls are bad, this still equates to a valuable tool for parents to teach their children how NOT to act. Moreover, Con made bare assertions, blatantly stating that trolls were bullies. Pro didn't have even close to a strong case for his side, but, with the help of Con, was able to fulfill the resolution to a better degree than did Con.

[*Reason for non-removal*] A vote need not exhaustively cover all arguments, especially if that vote establishes what the burden of proof is and how a given side is either meeting it or has failed to meet it. The RFD details the means by which Pro met his burden, and even explains how Con conceded the debate early with one of his arguments, regardless of dropped points. It is sufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by Tough 2 years ago
Tough
I was being sarcastic and will prove it in round 2.
Posted by Greg4586 2 years ago
Greg4586
" the only valuable role/function trolls serve to society is being a good thing for parents to point at and say "hey kids, never be this guy when you grow up"."

Con just admitted trolls are beneficial to society. Clearly he has conceded the debate. 7 points to Pro
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
DATXDUDEToughTied
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: Pro couldn't fulfill his BOP and I'm tempted to give Con arguments just for that, except for the fact that Con outright had shown a bigger impact and harm that internet trolls have on the internet. I'm sure that everyone here can agree that someone committing suicide is more serious and more harmful then someone telling a simple joke.
Vote Placed by ColeTrain 2 years ago
ColeTrain
DATXDUDEToughTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wasn't able to prove that trolls don't serve as a valuable function to society. In the first round, he mentioned that, at least, trolls serve as a lesson. If trolls are bad, this still equates to a valuable tool for parents to teach their children how NOT to act. Moreover, Con made bare assertions, blatantly stating that trolls were bullies. Pro didn't have even close to a strong case for his side, but, with the help of Con, was able to fulfill the resolution to a better degree than did Con.