Debate Info

Yes No
Debate Score:37
Total Votes:42
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 Yes (10)
 No (6)

Debate Creator

NathanAllen(2262) pic

Create Debate Supreme Court

Create Debate should have a team of people that take a vote on if something should be allowed on the site are if it should not be allowed... We have a supreme court for each debate category.

Put names of people that you would want on the team


Side Score: 21


Side Score: 16

If I had to choose anyone to be on the supreme court, I would choose chairs

Side: Yes

I move to second this motion.


Side: Yes
LadyLinkstar(415) Clarified
3 points

Make sense .

Side: Yes
2 points

We should have several Supreme Courts here, and each of them should have the right to ban the others.

Side: Yes

We have members in a group that vote for something and then if the person being voted on does not like the decision they can appeal to Federal Supreme Court Justice Andy.

And these trials as we could call them would have a time restriction on them. If someone does not vote yay or nay after a certain amount of time then their vote will not be considered because they never voted.

We could have like a 24 hours to vote on if they should stay or go. or of the debate should stay are be removed...

Side: Yes

Yes if we had a Supreme court on the site. we would not have to keep reporting people we would have a team of people that would vote debates and users out of the site. Addltd would have the final say on banning people. But for banning debates it would be much easier. Cause some of these debates can be be seen a racist or discriminating. And the team of members would vote on if the debate should stay are not...

Side: Yes
Hellno(17760) Disputed
4 points

It sounds like you don't like free speech. And we already have a supreme court, it's called Andy.

Side: No
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
0 points

Sodomites should be banned for putting stinky mud in peoples faces.

Side: No
Cartman(18192) Disputed
3 points

The rest of us straight people are able to avoid that. You are doing something wrong.

Side: Yes

I nominate myself!

Side: Yes
1 point

I adore this idea!!

But the mods will never go for it.

And we could never agree on who to appoint!

Side: Yes

I nominate myself !

Side: Yes
SlapShot(2607) Disputed
0 points


That's a fart sound.

You on the Court?

You'd be the last person I'd nominate.


You never debate.

You never take a side and strand by it.

Fight for it.

Have you ever even started a debate?

Or participated in formal one on one?

And on those rare occasions you offer an opinion you don't back if up. With sources or links or anything.

All of this has made me wonder sometimes why you even come here.

Instead of, say, a lesbian chatroom. Or Yahoo Answers.

Side: No
LadyLinkstar(415) Clarified
2 points

Okay .

Side: Yes

I support this only if I am made Chief Justice with veto power. .

Side: Yes
7 points

Making courts for the sake of exclusion would only confirm

a) You don't believe you or others can argue successfully enough to keep opponents at bay without the help of a court playing a parental role

b) You take this site way way WAYYYY too seriously. Heck, debate websites are basically chat rooms with a little structure added. Just let everyone chat.

c) Whenever a small core of people simply decide there is one right answer and anyone not agreeing is wrong then you've basically killed a debate site. Disagreement is really the only thing that keeps these places going. I've belonged to several other sites before this one which all largely fizzled because in the end it was just the same handful of people saying the same things together ad nauseum. Ironically, the handful of fools who exploit the "ban" feature to silence opposition actually help keep this place alive by the rest of us subverting, answering, and even duplicating their debates. We really don't need to ban the banners anymore then they really need to ban us.

d) Sounds like a lot of unnecessary work.

Side: No
2 points

So the idea is to enforce censorship on an otherwise very open website?

Never a good idea.

Besides, who uses this website enough to make up this court of personal opinion? I'd be surprised if anybody is willing to dedicate even more of their time to this notion which on its face is antithetical to what this site stands for.

Side: No
1 point

How are so many of you so greatly willing to curtail freedom of speech?

Would you really want this group of powerful users when they deny you the ability to create the debate that you want to create?

Side: No
NathanAllen(2262) Clarified
3 points

No you can make the debate. But if it catches the eye of a user and is reported. The group would decide what would happen to the debate. Same with users.

The only thing with users is that the person reporting them would have to provide links and details on what that user did wrong. It could a volunteer system. Like The Student Room has. They have volunteers that admin the site. Their not paid.

Side: Yes