CreateDebate


Debate Info

93
88
true false
Debate Score:181
Arguments:127
Total Votes:209
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 true (49)
 
 false (56)

Debate Creator

atypican(4873) pic



The downvoting feature is not helpful at this site.

My belief is that the down-voting feature is not only "not helpful" but actually discourages people from sharing their opinions.

true

Side Score: 93
VS.

false

Side Score: 88

True. I don't know what people who down vote hope to gain. Is it like, "You don't agree with me so I'm going to down vote you until you do." What's it all about? ;)

Side: true
5 points

I agree, more importantly, downvoting is prone to abuse and either should be harshly limited in usage (No more than one downvote a day allotted, requiring more than 100 points prior to voting, and should deduct 10 points from the downvoter), or simply done away with all together. Many users will be forced to express their disapproval by actually typing out a response, rather than just hitting a button.

Side: true
4 points

I have no problem with the down vote system but I will agree with one thing you said.... one should be required to have at least 100 (or some number) points before they can DV, that would discourage people from making fake accounts just to DV and I think Andy has said in the past that he is on board with that.

Side: true
Nebeling(1118) Disputed
3 points

I am sometimes too thick to accept a disapproving argument. I can simply ignore it by assuming what is being said is stupid, or engage in sophistry which helps no one, certainly not myself. A downvote though, that's not so easy to reject. If I know someone disapproves of me, but I don't know why, I start to wonder. It makes me self-analytical, making me more likely to discover why I am wrong.

Side: false
Stickers(1037) Disputed
1 point

I am sometimes too thick to accept a disapproving argument. I can simply ignore it by assuming what is being said is stupid, or engage in sophistry which helps no one, certainly not myself.

I've never seen you do this. In fact, I think that most people here refrain from doing this most of the time.

A downvote though, that's not so easy to reject. If I know someone disapproves of me, but I don't know why, I start to wonder. It makes me self-analytical, making me more likely to discover why I am wrong.

Most people (myself included) will not do this though. I will usually message the person, (if they're not Dana) since me getting downvotes from someone other than Dana is a bit outlandish, and it's easier for me to figure out where I went wrong by talking to them. I feel that arguments will occasionally take the place of what would've been a downvote, and like I said discussion is more effective, and it's not like even a sizable fraction of people here message each other over downvotes, it ends there. I will sit and think over a response, but a downvote simply demonstrates that I got someone upset (normally Dana).

Side: true

I think it is okay to downvote abuse, but I do not understand all of the fuss over this feature.

Side: true
Atrag(5126) Disputed
2 points

You don't just downvote abuse...

Side: false
Atrag(5126) Disputed
2 points

By downvoting a non-abusive comment you have just made my point. Thank you. Maybe you just downvote anything that doesn't have nude indecent images of children in it. :)

Side: false
7 points

I down voted you because you are abusive and you slandered me. I will never forgive you for lying. Go fuck yourself.

Side: true
2 points

For sure it is leading to people not giving their rebuttal opinion. If someone has something to say that goes against the given opinion they can just downvote it without saying what they didn't like.

Side: true
2 points

Neither the down-votes or the up-vote features are productive to this site as they currently are. They are used mostly as a tool to show popularity on a subject and a user, not on the contents of an argument. One should be required to post the reason why they voted so that everybody can see whether stupidity, popularity or intelligence was the bases of their vote.

As to how the current system works, it works like political elections. People merely vote for the one that is ahead in the polls and for those whose opinions resemble their on, not on the content of the argument. Until a change is made I expect down-votes and for the popular to be up-voted. When in Rome.....

Side: true
2 points

One has to wonder why a post gets down voted.

Is it because the argument was bad?

Is it because the down voter didn't like the person?

Is it because the down voter lacked a viable retort?

Or was it a simple misclick?

If a good argument receives several downvotes or if a bad argument receives a lot of upvotes, then it could leave readers confused and/or ignorant of the truth.

Since most upvotes/ downvotes lack explanations for why they are given and because upvotes/downvotes do not show the true or definite value of the post/argument, the system is flawed and useless.

Side: true
2 points

It is neither helpful nor hurtful.

It's a popularity button, that only in extreme cases hides really unpopular thoughts. Other than that I rarely even see it used.

Side: true
4 points

There should be some kind of mechanic built-in to this debate site for people who use weak arguments, fallacies, or ignore their opponent's points and attack them personally; those are all cheap ways to debate, and really just amount to arguing. To not have a system is to implicitly give equal respect to weak, sophomoric arguments as what is given to truth-based, logical arguments. Not all arguments are equal, some of them suck.

While I agree that there should be some kind of system that rewards solid, logical arguments and punishes weak arguments (or at least exposes them as weak), the power to punish/reward debaters should be in the hands of the debate creator, or a neutral moderator who works for the site.

Side: false
1 point

Who cares? I consider down votes a badge of honor! Wheeeeeeee!

Side: false
1 point

Or Sitara could just be banned.

Side: false
4 points

Ha! You see what she did there? Lol.

Side: false
1 point

I disagree, it helps point out the assholes and cunts.

Side: false