The Instigator
Pro (for)
5 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Is CreateDebate or DebateIsland better than for online debates?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2017 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,002 times Debate No: 100397
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)




The top 3 online debating options I would like to compare are,, and an up-and-comer is by far the oldest and most established online debating community. It offers the most robust formal debating functionality with comprehensive debate profiles and multiple formal rounds of debating, followed by voting. is a leader for formal multi-day 1-1 debating in front of an online audience. Some of the debates are highly offensive, and many debates get very little traction taking dates to complete (if you are lucky that it doesn't get abandoned all together). is also a well established online debating site. It offers a comprehensive profiling and polling system, and a large community. The quality of discussion is often lacking, and some of the content maybe highly offensive. is the newer offering for online debating. It has a fast growing engaged community and an elegant debating and polling experience that is right-sized for casual debating. What also stands out for DebateIsland that it is the most mobile-friendly and seems to be the most civil in its discussions and content. It can benefit from more comprehensive user profiles.

I also researched other viable online debating options, that I ultimately don't recommend. These include:
1) comments of newspaper articles - please don't go there, and I still cannot believe how many online comments articles from popular newspapers get every day. These are not debates, but personal attacks.
2) Facebook, Twitter, etc - the reason people debate online is not to strain relationships with their friends and family. It is far from ideal to spam your tweeter and Facebook feeds with all of your debates.
3) Various smaller sites and apps - although some are interesting concepts and offer niche experiences for online debating, none of them have a civilized moderated environment with sufficient community that has critical mass to be useful.

Bottom line:
I will argue that when was originally established, it made a lot of sense. It still may make sense for a small sub set of serious professional debaters. Those days many folks logged in to their computers and wrote long essays to debate their opinions on important social issues.
However, this type of formal debating is outdated. More people are interested in more casual debating while they are on the go. We want to debate realtime when We commute on our iPhone or iPad. We will not have patience for waiting days for that one person to reply. Also the issue with abandoned debates after initial round is widespread and is highly frustrating. After you invest all that time and energy writing that long essay, you find out days later that the other person just ignored you and your debate is cancelled. Wow! Talking about feeling of frustration and rejection!
The user interface really needs some serious updating to make it more mobile friendly. It has a lot of helpful content, but on a mobile phone it is barely usable. There are so many things, debates, polls, forums. However, they are all separate. should look to unify the experience. The forums section is pretty much comparable to comments in newspaper articles, and you don't want to go there.
The content is highly offensive or inappropriate in many cases. Please install a bot for moderating foul language and ensure that the moderator cleans up offensive material.
Finally, the 3 completed debate rule for voting rights is frustrating. Since most of the debates don't get any traction or get abandoned, the new users just end up being highly frustrated. The privileged class of users with voting rights can opine and vote on many thoughtful debates with little consideration - that make debaters feel like second class citizens. If you would like to debate half-baked comments from your voters then you are out of luck.

I suggest DebateIsland as my favorite. While it lacks some of the formal multi-round features and comprehensive profiles, I feel that its elegance of unified comments/debates/polling just works. The content is moderated and civility of its user base is a refreshing experience.

My second favorite is CreateDebate. It still has comprehensive user profiles and sophisticated voting, but doesn't limit you to 1-1 debating. I think it is better than for most users who'd like more causal debating, but it is still too clunky and not as good as DebateIsland. I am also concerned about quality of content and vulgar language on that site.

In conclusion,
I vote that there are better options than for mainstream debaters.



I thank my opponent for starting up this debate.

Definition of the term debate:
I feel it important to define the term debate, because I will be arguing these other "debating" websites are not even debate sites. A debate is "an argument about a particular subject, especially one in which many people are involved. That may not have been completely useful since now we need to define what an argument is. An argument is "an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one." Now that this has been established, I can move on.

Debateisland is not a debating website
If you follow the link my opponent offered for debateisland, click on any of the many "debates" there, you will see that these are more like polls. People get to vote one way or the other on a topic, and then post a comment. Every single one is basically the person's opinion. This is not an argument. That's just posting your opinion. In fact, if you use, we have exactly what debateisland has, it's our "polls" section. This is literally what debateisland is. It doesn't offer you the ability to debate with someone, it merely gives you the option to state your opinion on a given topic and answer a poll.

CreateDebate is not a debating website.
Again, if you follow the link offered by my opponent, it's pretty much exactly like debateisland except it looks different. Otherwise, they're essentially polls.

Bottom line:
Debateisland and createdebate should change their names to be pollisland and createpoll, because there is no debating going on in those websites, but only polls.

Rebuttal to opponent's points:
1) Now, perhaps people are interested in casual debating like my opponent said, but if they are, they want to actually debate. Again, those two websites don't offer the ability to debate people, it's merely stating your opinion on some topic. Maybe is outdated, but it's the only actual debating website I know of.
2) I agree that could be more mobile friendly. Still, it's the only real option for debating I know of.
3) Now, my opponent brought up how there is offensive material on the forums here. I don't see a problem with this, and I believe this is freedom of expression. Additionally, it says clearly in the terms of use that you have to be 18 or older to use this site, or else have parental permission[3]. A site designed for 18 year olds or older is going to have offensive material and adult content. Why should it be censored just because a few people don't like it? I would be willing to do what other sites do, such as put up "spoiler" warnings for when you post adult content or offensive material(which people would have to actually click on in order to see the content). Perhaps that could be a requirement that could implement so that people don't have to see offensive content if they don't want to. Either way, I am not bothered by the "offensive" material and many people are not. But it is still a valid point that some people are offended, and what I said would be a good solution to that problem. I don't see why moderators should be censorship NAZI's and make our freedom of expression deteiorate just because a few people are offended.
4) Regarding the 3 completed debates rule: I think this is actually a good idea. Do you just want anyone to be able to vote? You'd easily get trolls voting on people's debates. I've had trolls vote on my debates as it is, and I don't want that to be worse. In addition to helping prevent trolls from voting, the 3 debate rule makes it that you have to be familiar with the debating format to be able to vote. Do you want someone who has no idea what makes a good debate to decide the winner of a debate? I wouldn't. People should have some experience debating with others before judging the debate of another 2 people.

Now, in regards to the problem where people forfeit debates, that does happen, but I don't think it's often enough to be that huge of a problem. If you look at all of my debates, maybe 1/3 of them end up forfeited. I may not be representative of all of the users on here, but still, I imagine it's not all that different for others. Also, I heard apparently that originally made it that when you don't reply to a debate, it just makes the round forfeit, rather than the whole debate. I heard it's some glitch in the system that causes the whole debate to forfeit. I could be wrong about that of course. But if I'm right, then the original way is supposed to handle this is by making them just forfeit the round and the debate can continue to be completed even with just one debator.

I believe my points are sufficient reason why is better: it's actually a debating website and not a polling website disguised as a debating website
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you Capitalistslave for your comprehensive response and making interesting points.

Definition of "debate" and "polling"
I agree with you that we should clarify definition of debate. What you call "polling" functionality is actually fully within definition of the "debate", although I will argue that "polling" is inferior to the other sites. "Polling" is just recording of a vote, without ability for back and forth arguments. All 3 sites allow back and forth arguments using comments section in addition to voting as part of each debate. Nowhere in the "debate" definition it mandates that it has to be a 1-1 on debate.
You will see many debates that have heated back and forth interaction. Among many examples here is one: "debate" functionality "debate" functionality is also within definition of debate, but as I argued in round 1 it is highly ineffective. In round 1, you concurred with my view that it is: outdated, 1/3rd of debates are abandoned - that imho to most people is unacceptable.
(I almost wanted to abandon this debate in round 2 just to prove my point how frustrated you would feel to waste so much of your time.)

I also would like to point out that even not abandoned many of the debates get very little comments, unlike the other 2 sites.
I continue to advocate that some offensive contact on and createdebate should not be tolerated. It is not about being 18 or older, but mainstream debaters just don't want to be exposed to such foul topics and language. People want to debate in a civilized manner, not being cursed at, of having to scroll bunch of debates with topics that will make your stomach turn inside out.
The 3-completed voter rule on is meant to remediate all the other inefficiencies of that legacy system that just doesn't work for most people. It is a patch on a broken process with bad user experience. "polling" functionality
Since "debate" functionality is essentially ineffective, we should focus the rest of the debate on comparing "polling" with and
As you pointed out is outdated and that supports my argument.
Polls on lack high quality content, and many users don't even think of them as primary site mechanism to debate. The killer argument against polls is that unlike the other 2 sites it is only meant for a short description of each option - not appropriate for most debates. and supports as much text as a debater needs in both description and comments.

Why we debate:
As best negotiators, the point is not to always "win" your opponent, but to look for a win-win creative solution. The format of DebateIsland, CreateDebate, and to limited extend poll has functionality to do that. By getting multiple perspectives we are able to both make our arguments, and enrich our understand of the debate by allowing multiple opinions, while having a clear view of votes on each option.
In that spirit, I would like to win-win this debate with a creative approach. Since this debate is about all 3 sites, I took the liberty of re-creating this debate on all 3 sites (i couldn't create poll due to some sort of a bug, which actually proves my point). Lets have the combined community weigh in, and this way we will truly have the balanced view on this topic. Let the best solution win!

I believe that the pecking order of these debate sites:

The links are

Please see our debate on and vote at

On debateIsland at

On CreateDebate at


While there may be some examples of back and forth interaction, if you look at several or many of the "debates" on debateisland, they don't have any of that. That's because it's not required for you to interact with anyone else. The format itself isn't a debating format, since you're not required to interact with someone like you are here on You can easily just vote on those polls and not make any comment and then it's not a debate at all. The same is true of the polls section here on Frankly, I don't see how debateisland is better than the polls section here on They're essentially the same thing. You can still have interaction with other users in the polls area on here too. It's pretty much exactly the same. essentially offers more options for a person, which I say more options is better.

As for the offensive material, as you said, it's just in the forums. As anyone can see, there is basically no offensive material in the debates section of this site. If you don't want any offensive material, then just avoid the forums.

As for the polls section, it doesn't need to have the ability for long descriptions since you can have a long actual debate if you wanted one. The polling section is literally more about polls in, so there wouldn't be much debating go on there.

Debateisland seems to try to combine the ability to debate and the polling mechanism. Except it fails because people don't even have to debate and that doesn't seem to be the focus of the format. It seems to favor polling over debating.
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 years ago
>Reported vote: DboPoint// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Pro (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: I vote for the pro. I personally find a much better site and have been debating on all 3. That gives me a unique perspective. I disagree with con arguments regarding taking the debate into some sort of legal dedinition of polling vs debating. Let's be clear, all 3 are debating sites and polling on is not used for debates. I award the pro my vote for more convincing argument. I believe both made good arguments in round, but round 2 was clearly won ad con didn't really counter pros points. Same for reliable sources. I really like the idea of pro putting up this same debate on 2 other sites, and quickly I checked that both debates has overwhelming suppot for debateIsland. That proves to me 3 points, the other sites get much more tradtion then, has a more engaged community, and debateIsland has passionate supporters that based on comments really suppot the site. I vote for

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to assess specific points made by both debaters. There appears to be no specific assessment of Pro"s argument. Disagreeing with a specific tactic used by one of the debaters is an assessment of that argument, but the voter cannot argue the issue themselves, nor can they insert their own views on the topic into their RFD, as they have done here. (2) Sources are insufficiently explained. While the voter explains why the sources helped him decide which way he was voting, he neglects to compare them between the two debaters. As both sides used sources, the voter is required to compare the two to make their decision.
Posted by TrumpFan 2 years ago
Thank you all who participated so far. Wanted to provide a checkpoint since I posted this debate on all 3 sites yesterday:
On - winning 5 to 3

On debateIsland - winning 10-0

On CreateDebate winning 28-4

Please continue debating. Thanks.
Posted by DboPoint 2 years ago
I checked out the 2 debates at and CreateDebate and it has lots of support for pro position, especially for debateisland. That was an interesting idea TrumpFan to put up the same debate on 3 sites to make your point.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by KnightOfDarkness 2 years ago
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: Con's argument about how the other websites seem to be more like polling websites was compelling. There wasn't any sort of format on the other sites that specifically encourage debating, as they pointed out. Pro tried to counter this by showing an example of people going back and forth at each other, but the format of the other sites doesn't seem to support that. As con pointed out, majority of the polls on debateisland don't have back and forth interaction, which anyone can see if they go to it. The more options argument that con offered is a plus too. As they pointed out, there is little difference between the polling section of and all of debateisland. offers a greater variety of things, as they pointed out.
Vote Placed by DboPoint 2 years ago
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: The con's counter-argument was around definition of polls vs debates. The pro laid out very specific points, answered the counter points, and provided a clear counter argument in round2 disputing the definition by the con. The con failed to effectively address pros counter point regarding annoyance of overall user experience of 33% abandoned debates. The profanity point made by the pro applied to the overall debating site, but con suggested to stay away from particular sections to avoid profanity. That counter argument is not convincing as that information wouldn't be known to inexperienced users until profanity is encountered. Both used sources to support the debate. Con's sources anchored to definition in the dictionary, but he failed to analyze specific aspects of the definition don't apply to the debate functionality of both sides. For example in the provided definition of the word "debate", functionality of all 3 sites would qualify based on my assessment of that definiti
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 2 years ago
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: As a native of createdebate from back in the early days of twenty-oh-seven, I may be uniquely qualified to vote on this debate. Con rightfully points out that DDO has the same features as these other sites (polling) plus a formal debating option, which the other sites lack. Even if I agree with pro about the quality of the content of each site, this is a product of the community and not the site itself. As far as the actual features of each site goes, I see no compelling argument for why any aspect of the other two sites are either unique to those sites or superior to what DDO offers, and so I give con the win.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.