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

Is a previous site a good site to cite in a debate?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Judge Point System: Select Winner
Started: 10/12/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 495 times Debate No: 63148
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




First round is acceptance, and then 1 round to give points. Good Luck
Debate Round No. 1


My logic for saying "Yes" it is a good citation is the simple fact the public voted for the winner, and therefore shows a sampling of the public's opinion on the matter at hand. Another reason is the pure fact that is

That is why it is clear the only possible answer to this question is yes.

Over to con.


There is no official credibility to anything on DDO at all. It is only officially credible if verified also on an outside source.

Seeing what other people voted on another debate of a similar topic unfairly causes bias in the voters' minds and alters their decision.

Sourcing DDO links reduces originality and will make a debate appear plagiarize the previous debate and could hamper a debater's credibility altogether.

As for " is", I have no idea how this is relevant.
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
@RainbowDash That could be because its disrespectful towards your opponent. You are expected to make arguments in a debate the same way your opponent does, not simply refer him/her to a past debate.
Posted by RainbowDash52 2 years ago
Once my opponent made a supporting claim which I already disproved in a previous debate with the same person and won the debate with 2 people voting for me and other voting for a tie. I sited that debate saying I already proved that point wrong. The voters didn't respect that I sited an old debate but I thought it was stupid to argue the exact same points again and thought siting the previous debate made more sense.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
I kinda thought that Con missed out three obvious points:

(1) No one on debates in their official or professional capacity. This means, firstly, that no one is an expert on the subject matter, and the links cannot be taken as such. It also means that no one is held professionally accountable for what they write. They may misleadingly misquote sources that a voter cannot discern, for example.

(2) Debates on this site have a character limit. Sometimes, one side may compromise on arguments in favour of rebuttals. The debate resolution is then not discussed in appropriate depth.

(3) Voters are not experts. They judge debates not on the quality of exploration of the topic, or truth of the resolution, but on the quality of the arguments provided by both debaters. A seasoned debater could easily rebut all the claims of an amateur, but that says nothing about the truth of the resolution at hand.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
Yeah what's the voting requirement?
Posted by 9spaceking 2 years ago
who are the judges?
No votes have been placed for this debate.