• A valid opinion does not need an identity

    , However your opinion becomes one of greater presence if your able to uphold it with your identity. This makes a great impression as it implies that whomever you are and as more personal details are revealed, You are still able to stick with the opinion and stay calm. An impression, That allows you to seemingly fend of so called personal or group interests and a focus on a hypothetical dilemma or issue.

    As for "trolls" I would ask you this: physically yes they are part of the discussion, But rhetorically this becomes questionable, So I would say your own opinion is never directed to them, Online its for all to see. It's hard to judge (even a troll) on how much time and effort they spent their joke, Maybe it has remarkable comedic value, Either way if your call/opinion doesn't get heard (time and effort). Nobody else is obliged is it. An online platform is technically still a message to everyone, While in real life your able to direct the message to a friend or mentally valued stranger with the necessary effort. Online you risk having high expectation of people, Who you haven't even glimpsed at. Don't value opinions or response higher then in real life their always better as your able to micro-adjust them to the face your speaking to. Of course your able to get value out of something on the Internet, But the chances of being adopted in the way it was intended becomes severely lower then in reality.

    The Internet is another platform, Which of course houses residents of personal messages to friends and many other forms of organised or open communication.
    Simply allowing a form of discussion seems like a strange point to disagree on, Whether if this is your preferred method, Now that's an already better discussion. I don't mind needing to giving up or hiding my identity. I think they both have their charm. I just like the idea of nobody being to afraid of telling a certain opinion, Which could have been a very valuable opinion on something as identity revelation. Especially online it is more easy to have zero interaction and no fear of judgement. The hypothesis of losing someone's idea would simply sadden me.

    Yours truly Jesus

  • I think so, But. . .

    It results in many trolls, As the first "NO" person posted. Overall I think it's okay if there is a human-backed report system being utilized by the community. The only problem is the inevitable "debater fraud" (lol I'm funny and relevant) where people submit multiple arguments to sway the outcome. This isn't too big an issue though, As the status bar doesn't really affect much here, Aside from giving viewers some idea as to the state of peoples opinions. One big fat maybe from me.

  • Yes you idiot

    Ok person in the no side you are literally an anonymous user so you are being racist agianst yourself. Anyway let anonymous people debate because that way people can express their true opinions without having people cancel them, And also attack and spam their account if they were forced to have one. Without an account we can have more honest opinions on the website

  • Most of them are trolls

    While some can be helpful on debates. Most of them are gonna vote multiple times on a side so they can troll and make false claims and claims that have that aren’t apart of a debate, They shouldn’t make topic because for the same issues. Most of them are heavily biased and because of their anonymity of the Internet, Most anonymous users can get away with bad habitats on shitposting topics.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

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