by Amelia Schaffer

Created on: June 21, 2009   Last Updated: June 22, 2009

Helium users should be asked to rate articles for the side with which they disagree instead of the one with which they agree. Debate articles are different than other Helium articles in that they must present not only a well-researched, written, and edited piece, but also a coherent and convincing argument for their side. The ranking for debate articles, therefore, must place considerable weight on the nature and success of the argument, perhaps even more weight than on the article's style and technical details. The point of a debate, after all, is to convince others that your side is right, not merely to share ideas with people who already agree with you.

But if raters already agree with a debate article's argument, it is difficult for them to judge which article would be better at convincing others.They are, therefore. more likely to rank articles based on their style and tone, or to rate an argument they personally like higher regardless of how convincingly the article's author argued their points.

If Helium users rated articles for the side of the debate with which they disagreed, they would be better able to judge the merits of the arguments presented. They could rank articles based on how well they explained their opponents' position and perhaps even led them to reconsider their own views.

If Helium users were asked to rank articles for the opposing side of the debate, their strategies for writing good debate articles might change. They would have to demonstrate a better understanding of the opposing side's arguments, as rankers from the other side of the debate would be quick to recognize straw men and other logical fallacies. They would also have to gear their arguments towards convincing someone who disagrees with their position. Writers would no longer be able to count on a clever style or the sympathy of people already on their side to get them higher rankings; instead, they would have to spend time crafting a good argument, one concise enough to hold the attention of someone who disagrees with their premise, but one which demonstrates a full understanding of both sides of the debate.

One potential problem would be that raters may not have enough knowledge of the opposing side of the debate. They may not be able to tell a good argument from a bad one if, for example, they did not know which article presented factual information and which was not well-researched. However, Helium already allows users to skip articles if they do not know enough about the topic to rate them well; this tool could be used for debate articles as well.

This potential problem would not overshadow the benefits of forcing the writers of debate articles to stop preaching to the choir and start writing concise and persuasive arguments geared towards the opposing side of the debate.

Learn more about this author, Amelia Schaffer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.