by Perry McCarney

Created on: October 11, 2007   Last Updated: February 12, 2011

The question here at Helium is whether the debate articles should be rated by those who agree with the premise articulated in the article or those who don't. Currently those who agree rate them. Perhaps it shouldn't matter and anyone should be able to rate articles on either side, although only against each other. However, it is probable that this would make rankings within debate topics extremely volatile. But does that really matter?

Helium is the website where knowledge rather than emotion is meant to rule. On this basis it is my contention that articles proclaiming for one side of a debate should be judged by those writers who favor the other side, if it has to be one or the other. This may appear on first view to be counter-productive, won't those who feel the other way deliberately rate articles they feel persuasive lower than those they don't, if not consciously then subconsciously? Well, that depends on the integrity of the Helium community; personally I believe that Helium members will rate articles on the side they disagree with on the basis of their quality, where those that agree might be more inclined to favor those that detail their own attitudes.

Helium asks us to decide our opinion on debate topics possibly before reading any of the arguments submitted by either side. We are then only allowed to rate articles on the side we have either voted or written for. How can this facilitate rational discussion or reasoned debate?

When I was at school I was captain of my form's debating team. We lost our first debate, but never lost another. This was in large part because I was able to think outside the box, I came up with arguments on the issue being debated that the opposition had not thought of, and therefore had no answer to.

I apply this same principle here at Helium, or I did, I rarely write to debate topics any more because, basically, my approach does not do well. I feel perfectly justified in believing that this is because the articles are rated by those on that side of the debate. The accepted, common arguments in favor of that side of the debate are rated up, because they conform with the prejudices of those rating, sometimes consciously but even subconsciously in those who believe they are trying to rate unbiasedly.

By only being presented with articles to rate on the side that we emotively agree with, are we not in danger of, whether intentionally or not, promoting those that appeal to us emotionally. Does this not minimize our thoughts

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>