The Instigator
blond_guy
Pro (for)
Losing
30 Points
The Contender
mrqwerty
Con (against)
Winning
36 Points

Members should be allowed to see who voted for who.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/28/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,829 times Debate No: 2271
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (19)
Votes (22)

 

blond_guy

Pro

Based on a debate I had before on patriotism where stevster (my contender) had some disturbing mindless arguments, I believe debate.org should allow us to see who voted for who. One of those reasons is that I am currently losing 2-4 and I'm curious to know what 4 idiots voted either without looking at the arguments or liked to take up on stevster's bribe to "suck [their] **** clean"

Also, this system would make it easier for members to recognize who is running multiple accounts in order to vote multiple times in a debate.
mrqwerty

Con

Hello Blond_guy. I am not too good at debating, but I would love to take up your offer to debate this topic. I'm a bit nervous about the entire thing, but I'll give it a try.

It is true that in this site, debate.org, that some people have a tendency to vote for whatever side they believe in rather than which contender poses the better argument. In the debate "The Nazis Were Evil" (1), kvaughan conducted an interesting experiment whether or not people would vote for a particular side because of a superior argument, or a personal belief. While the people who voted for a superior argument outnumbered the people who voted for a single cause by four, as of 9:37 1.28.08, it was indeed disturbing to see that 13 people voted on an argument solely due to personal belief. In your argument on patriotism (2), I believe the same thing occurred on your debate as well. In general, people like to vote on things based off of personal opinion rather than superior argument.

While it is in the interests of the users to win a debate due to a superior argument, I doubt that listing the names of the people who had voted on a particular side would change anything. You said that, "I'm curious to know what 4 idiots voted either without looking at the arguments."(5) Would curiosity justify a breach of privacy? First off, the system that debate.org uses, is a similar system that world governments use worldwide. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, "periodic and genuine elections... shall be held by secret vote." (3) The United Nations states that anonymity is crucial to a genuine election. Why? Consider if this site, debate.org, allowed the posting of peoples' names. If you had the names of these, "4 idiots", what exactly would you do? From what you've said about these "idiots" who "liked to take up on stevster's bribe to "suck [their] **** clean""(5), it seems that you would harass or demean whomever voted for stevster. According to the debate.org terms of use, "You agree to not use the Service to harass or "stalk" anyone." (4) Debate.org protects the names of the users in order to protect them from harassment or attack.

On top of that, people who voted on a controversial debate would be harassed or attacked because of their vote, whether or not they voted for a superior argument or their beliefs. In fact, you, according to your statements (5) would feel pretty angry at the people who voted against you. You are not alone, many people would not feel particularly tender towards the people who voted against them. This fear would drive people away from voting on a controversial debate, not just the people who would vote for their beliefs only, but also the people who would vote for a better argument. Revealing the names of who voted, would also entail a form of voter suppression as well, ruinous towards free speech and expression on debate.org .

The last point you made was that, "this system would make it easier for members to recognize who is running multiple accounts in order to vote multiple times in a debate."(5) Is it really our task to determine who is running multiple accounts in order to vote multiple times on a debate? The IP address collecting service used by debate.org (6) is a more objective way of determining the identity of a particular user. The fact that debate.org knows, "the webpage from which you came"(6), can ensure that someone is not logging out of an account and logging into another account. Secondly, what would happen to a accused multiple account? It would get attacked by whatever member was conducting the multiple account search.

In short, revealing the accounts of the users would achieve very little, except enable people to conduct a retaliation, which would constitute voter suppression. While an interesting concept that does have its merits, the disadvantages would outweigh the advantages.

P.S. By the way, I voted for you against stevster's "argument." You deserved to have won that debate, and I'm sure that over time, you will win the debate.

P.P.S. Could any of you guys help me out here for constructive criticism and feedback? I would really appreciate it!

Sources:
(1)http://www.debate.org...
(2)http://www.debate.org...
(3)http://www.un.org...
(4)http://www.debate.org...
(5)http://www.debate.org...
(6)http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 1
blond_guy

Pro

Thank you for your support (in come things).
It's natural to be nervous on your first debate. It's not natural to do so well as you did though. But most of all you made your argument clear TO ME, instead of trying to destroy my argument and my character like most do. (check out dalzuga's comments in that debate)

However, I stand by my argument. It is true that people could do immoral things when receiving information on who voted against them. But this would not be a concern for debate.org because people should speak their opinion without being afraid that someone will harass them.

Personally, I wouldn't harass these people that voted for stevster but to a certain extent I WOULD demean them. I would point out to all members that either they are the ones who don't read debates before voting or that they are the votes that people should not consider. Hiding behind the fact that no one can tell you voted for a certain person is what leads many members to just vote because it shows that most simply don't care.

"This fear would drive people away from voting on a controversial debate"

1st of all, I'd rather have less people vote if it stopped some other people from voting without reading.
2nd of all, I think that is great to show people that many times when you give your opinion, there are often consequences, but you should give your opinion anyway! e.g. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out and he got killed for it, may he rest in peace. But your opinion is never in vain and you should make sure you speak your mind without any fear of others. (I should know, I had a 0% win ratio)
mrqwerty

Con

Hello, sorry I couldn't respond earlier, I was busier today. You said in your rebuttal that, "Personally, I wouldn't harass these people that voted for stevster but to a certain extent I WOULD demean them." (1) Fair enough. Even if we assumed that you would only demean them instead of harass them, from the perspective of the recipient, that might very well be harassment and a violation of their privacy. Moreover, how are we to make sure that other people won't harass others? If we enabled everyone to see who voted for whom, what is to prevent other people from abusing the change of rules? Pardon me, but I don't see how this modification would stop them at all. It would make debate.org a site where people would be free to abuse each other for the simple act of voting. At the very least it would severely tax all of the administrators with policing. Simply put, you nor I have any control over how people would use or abuse the new system.

You said, "I'd rather have less people vote if it stopped some other people from voting without reading." (1) I agree with you here, that it would stop other people from voting without reading. But, would it not also stop people who did vote, from voting for the better argument? If you enable the revelation of usernames, what would happen? Take a conservative example - What if you voted for the idea that Nazis were not evil? (2) Let's say that there is a side that is morally repugnant to you and to most people, but has a superior argument. If you voted for that side, people would then see your name there. If they did, you would be associated with holocaust deniers and neo-nazis. Do you want that? Remember that this is a relatively mild example, there are plenty of more horrifying opinions I could vote for, many of them on this site. Far from preventing people for voting for their beliefs, it would encourage it.

The last thing that you said was,

>> 2nd of all, I think that is great to show people that many times when you give your opinion, there are often consequences, but you should give your opinion anyway! e.g. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke out and he got killed for it, may he rest in peace. But your opinion is never in vain and you should make sure you speak your mind without any fear of others. (1)

Sure, in an idealistic world, people should be able to speak without fear of reprisals. That is why Martin Luther King Jr. was exceptional, he died for his beliefs and opinions. Many people were persecuted and killed for their beliefs in the past and that is why they are extraordinary people. But, these people are just that, EXCEPTIONAL and EXTRAORDINARY people. Most people do care about what other people think, it is an ability that we have that enables us to live in society. Sure MLK Jr. would die for his beliefs, but would John Smith want to be harassed for a simple vote? I wouldn't count on it. That's why vote suppression works, and why it would work here if we revealed who voted for whom. By all means necessary, if you want to disclose your personal vote, you are free to do that in the comments box. But it should never be something that people are forced to do. Voter Anonymity is a right that everyone must have. (3) Disclosing the identity of voters violates that right.

To summarize, I have shown that Voter Anonymity is a right (3) and that, by its very definition, the disclosure of the identities of voters violates that right. You can see that it would enable voter suppression via harassment. This harassment would be in-discriminant and hurt everyone, regardless of whether people voted for a superior argument or belief. In that respect, the advantage it is supposed to give is simple ineffectual. Any other benefits provided by identity disclosure are also negligible and are already provided by auxiliary services. In short, there is no reason to request a total overhaul of the current system. It would be far too much trouble to experiment with, and the advantages gained are, at best, dubious. Thank you for reading.

Sources:
(1)http://www.debate.org...
(2)http://www.debate.org...
(3)http://www.un.org...

Feedback is appreciated.
Debate Round No. 2
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by blond_guy 9 years ago
blond_guy
tatarize and mrqwerty, u have some pretty good ideas on the voting system. I can't wait till it changes!

Check out my debate on T.V. though, because I have no comments there and I need a second opinion (from reasonable people).
Posted by AntiPatriot 9 years ago
AntiPatriot
Voting when you haven't read a debate is quite annoying, but it's the internet--what are you going to do? However the truth is that EVERYTHING is based on personal opinion. When someone votes for something when they actually DID read the argument, they are saying, "It is my opinion that side X had a better argument than side Y." Better is a subjective term and hence, its interpretation is open to opinion.
Posted by mrqwerty 9 years ago
mrqwerty
Hahaha, I didn't appreciate how utterly ironic the situation was, Tatarize. How very perceptive!
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Also, as for evidence. I debated against puppies should be tortured and killed. I am presently losing 10-30 votes. My debate consisted of logical nonsense with no direct issue to the argument at hand. My statements were crafted not even to make sense. Still not a shutout.
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
What makes you think somethings wrong with it? People just vote randomly. No real reason involved.

You've been hit with a catch-22. Your argument is absolutely right. And Blond_guy is arguing that you should be able to see who voted for you in order to stop people from voting against arguments which are absolutely right and at least be able to take issue.

You've been voted down with the better argument (and really a fantastic one at that) on fairly close to no grounds at all. Also, goldspurs probably voted for you just to spite blond_guy. So though your argument is better, the fact that you're currently tied is roughly speaking evidence of blond_guys suspicions. So ironically the more people vote for blond_guy the more he's right about people voting for people they shouldn't.
Posted by mrqwerty 9 years ago
mrqwerty
Hello. Could someone tell me what I did wrong in my argument? I would really be grateful, thanks.
Posted by mrqwerty 9 years ago
mrqwerty
Thank you very much for your comments Webmaster.Do you have an idea of what the voting system will be replaced with?

I had an idea that perhaps voters could vote separately for their beliefs and rate different arguments, but that is simply a suggestion I had. But thank you again for your time, we really appreciate it.

How could we get better at debate?
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
Moreover, it would stop folks like goldspurs from running around and posting that same message on every one of blondguy's posts.
Posted by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
How about an option to not show my debates or give the names within an argument or see the comments until *AFTER* you vote. And occasions repopups of old arguments so they keep getting votes.

So the *ONLY* think you know about the debate is the debate. No picture, no name, no knowing them from other debates.

For example, Solar might win an argument if people didn't just see his island graphic go vote against him. Case and point, he has about three times the number of votes against him in any debate than any typical debate.
Posted by Webmaster 9 years ago
Webmaster
Hi Everyone,

Great debate you have going here. I'm seeing some great suggestions and comments all over the site and I encourage you to keep them coming.

I just thought I'd let you know that the voting system is going to be completely revamped for the next version. This version is set to launch in Feb/Mar.

As for users with multiple accounts. Whenever we find a user that has more than one account we close all of their accounts and ban their IP. While some sneaky users may go unnoticed the majority are usually caught thanks to the help of members reporting their actions.

I'm glad everyone is enjoying Debate.org and I wish everyone the best of luck. It is up to the members to make Debate.org a great site and so far everyone is doing a wonderful job.

-Webmaster
22 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by FalseReality 8 years ago
FalseReality
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by out_n_proud_HINDU 8 years ago
out_n_proud_HINDU
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by Out_and_Proud 9 years ago
Out_and_Proud
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by RonPaul08 9 years ago
RonPaul08
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by khaylitsa 9 years ago
khaylitsa
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by oboeman 9 years ago
oboeman
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by Logos 9 years ago
Logos
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by nebosleeper 9 years ago
nebosleeper
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
blond_guymrqwertyTied
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