Is it your experience that *most* people just vote and provide little (if any) content?
I try to pick the best and most controversial arguments for this reason.
I've told and showed my girlfriend this site, which I think she'd like, but she cannot get into it because some of the questions and opinions are too shallow to get into. I think all this place needs is some more people who want it to work and don't accept it for what it is.
We need some sense of culture here too. I get so many ad hominem attacks with very little worth-while opposing ideas... it gets tiring.
Yeah, and it's annoying that you could say so much and get 4 or 5 up or down votes without hearing anything else on what you've said... I don't know if these people voting actually read what I've said or their voting for the sake of the main argument. Are they just trying to throw the debate to appease the little graph on the side over there?
I don't know, but I'll stick around to find out.
Yeah, but then again it's nice to just be able to vote someone down that is a complete waste of time and not have them expect for you to say something. Some people don't have time for that and if there is someone that doesn't particularly care about you, and by that I mean, someone who doesn't hate you and doesn't like you, always finding that they must vote you down, you wouldn't want a quarrel with that person.
I find that people here take things too personally, which is understandable because in a debate you are essentially stating your opinion, which is so closely tied to your whole belief system, and then doing it to be challenged... some people just don't get the whole idea behind debating.
So, I don't mind not seeing them, but yeah, if there was a way to maybe allow your votes to be seen, like, an option that would unblock your anonymity to invite this sort of interaction, that would be great too.
I agree that some of the questions and opinions are too shallow to get into. But how do we develop a measuring stick? (Leaving aside my debates and taking whatever is left over) What some one considers shallow, some one else may not. And even though some one may want deep philosophical discussions, others may want levity. Now if the site decides that there's no room for levity, then that's fine. But I'm not aware of such a decision and I've asked point blank if my comments and arguments are hurting this site because it is not my intent to be malicious. My intent is to interject some levity because arguments can become a little too heavy for some. And what is too heavy for some may the be the right weight for others. I just don't see how to make this site a one size fits all but I'm willing to abide by the creators. I guess this site is going through some growing pains but I think that the people here have the same goal, for this site to work. We just don't seem to agree on how achieve that.
As far as the ad hominem attacks, maybe we can have a way to vote an argument as attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. Then after a certain number they are banned from the date or the site. The idea would be to help a person improve their argument by pointing out this particular flaw. I don't know. Just a thought.
Hmm, I think... I think that's a good idea too.
Maybe then, if you were to add that they've attacked people in argument, it would show up in their profile under activity... Then, if all of these arguments were consolidated in a link to a page that would show all of these attacks, you could change your vote as to whether or not it really was a serious attack or not. I mean, I love that the votes are flexible (you can vote down accidentally, and then vote up twice to correct it and so on), so maybe these too.
That way if someone says something to someone and at first was taken the wrong way, and reported as an attack, other people could see it and vote on whether or not it really was as bad as it was originally taken. This would at least keep people who don't deserve so many attacks from looking more aggressive than they are, you know?
Then also, this would help weed out the people who just... aren't good at debating. By weed out, I mean, maybe help them understand what they are doing that the rest of the community doesn't appreciate. Ad hominem arguments are not what I want to see here, I mean, if people want to be trolls all day they can do that somewhere else, not here.
And because I'm talking to you about trolls, know that you're not that type of troll, lol. I kid, I kid. <3
I don't know though, In a lot of ways, when you're debating, i think that it's good to show everything. Like, what did a person vote up on, what did a person vote down on? That way, if you go to someone's profile to see their votes, you can see if they've voted everything on one side of the argument up, and everything on the other side down.
( I have to admit, I am guilty of this when I go into a debate and I see everything on one side voted down and sometimes everyone 0 or less... everyone, and everyone the other side 2,3,4,5,6,7,8 :^/ )
Some people don't like that much government, but I think it would be best for the debate, you know? Isn't that what it's all about?
P.S. There is a jet the size of Florida flying over my house every 2 min... odd much?
Obviously, as with all websites, the amount of casual users compared to users who are actively involved is going to be high. With a site such as this, I can understand why.
I think there is a big difference between being able to read other's views and opinions and be able to support (or not) certain arguments, and being able to correctly and coherantly express your views and arguments in a debate. For example, as I'm from England I'm unable to actively participate in debates centering around American issues (such as the presidential race, Mmerican foreign policy, American sports, etc). What I feel I can do to stay involved though is read through the debates, vote up well thought-out and explained arguments, and vote down those that I don't support; whilst at the same time learning about the subject matter. When I can get actively involved in a debate, I'll try my best to. I feel this is probably the stance that a lot of people take at the moment: and would definately explain why the differences between votes and active contributions may differ.
You also find that some people are naturally more gifted at forming an opinion and having the skills to get that opinion across, and those people are the ones who will be the "well known" users.
I think I'm finding that more people just vote for the side that they like and provide little content. I find that on opinions that are very strong and polar people generally just vote for the first opinion on the top for the side that they like. Then, it just seems like a lot of the regulars that provide opinions never achieve very high votes when they are elsewhere in the topic.
I don't see what is so hard for some of these voters just to put down a fast argument. Most of the arguments on the site don't require more than a minute of research to find something that says that it is incorrect. But again, if it isn't at the top, it rarely gets very many votes.
My experience so far is that very few people (compared to the total number of recruits, old and new) provide any content. It appears that most of them just vote. When they get it in their heads that they don't like you, they vote you down with a vengeance. If they find themselves voting you down enough, they then declare you an enemy. Finally, if confronted, you realize why it is that they didn't contribute much in the first place. This becomes obvious when they chose the lowest common denominator and start calling you names.
But hey, your mileage may vary and your experience may be totally different than mine. I'd like to read your thoughts.