In the debates i have done, no one has actually understood what i've said, which in all extent which i believe is quite immature. What is the point of having a debate if you do not listen and try to understand your opponent. A good debate is when you and your opponent actually understand and accept what each other are saying and work from that.
Now I understand that the voting system is useful and probably even necessary. Being scored on your debating ability makes people put thought into their arguments and not use lazy tactics. But on the other hand, it also encourages you to be adamant in your position no matter what. When your opponent makes a salient point, it might actually change your mind in a normal conversation, but in a debate here, you are in the game to WIN. You don't concede you might be wrong until the bitter end, and that means in the middle of a debate you are driven to attack any point your opponent makes no matter how reasonable it seems to you. Debates are supposed to be about understanding your opponents view and trying to mutually resolve your difference of opinion, but scores make it more a fight to bend the other person to your way of thinking.
None of the points come from agreeing with the opponent or not. Rather, it comes from using sources, good conduct, good spelling and grammar. The only part that might make it seem what the person is saying is the "who was more convincing." Even then, though, I don't know if it's completely true.
In arguments nowadays, a "win-lose mentality" is endorsed, because you can "win" simply by going on for so long on stupid tangents that your opponent no longer cares (this has happened to me before). However, here, you don't get points for driving people away, or even convincing people, you get points for making good arguments, having good spelling & grammar, and being respectful. As such, a win-lose mentality is actually a hindrance because it allows emotion to leak in, thereby harming you on all fronts overall.
Another user maybe superior to the challenger or vice-versa, but based on the way I see it, I aspire to be enriched by your side as well, i can see the dwonfall of what i state and the domination of several points i may create. I am here to learn, to nourish my brain. I come here to fail not succeed; my purpose is to understand another human as he or she may be, not to show my dominance over a weak minded one. I see this as a fallacy almost, because many of the users may be unaware of many topics and may only come to gain conciousness of their surrounding of the potential of the rest of the world. The fallacy lies under who has the best arguemnt, who has the best tactics, but then again...Knows the least.