Debate.org Should Have A Stats Page.

sorry for the missed round. here we go. .. 1- the 3.0 version is already delayed and has been for months and months. if we want this new expanded feature even in v 4.0, we will probably have to wait even longer for THAT. 2- "According to your logic the fact that debate. org even provides info about people's ages/faiths/political parties/ etc,. . etc. .. is useless b/c they might not be totally accurate. " and yep, that's pretty much exactly what i'm saying. it's useless now and it would be useless in the future to have even more focus on these matters (beliefs). i agree with you that voting on this site is biased, but i think it will be hard to notice these "trends" you speak of because i think the bias supercedes the trends. in other words, it'll be hard to pin point any "trends" because it has more to do with whom on this site likes whom and who wants to down vote whom. so if you can't find trends, again, there is no point to this. 3- if you're agreeing with me that people may not want to start debates for certain reasons, then how can you respond with "sure but we'd have to analyze the debate itself to determine that" ? if there's no debate then there's nothing to read/determine. and you have agreed with me on this point, so. 4- well, point 2 indicated that people can change their POV at any time. my pt. 4 was saying that people may not want to list their beliefs at ALL and that it's a privacy issue. so what happens if the debate. org owner spends all this time money and research or whatever and implements this whole thing, but then nobody actually USES it and just leaves it blank. .. ? it'll be even more pointless and in fact a hinderance. 5- to this pro has responded "neither of us know what would happen so you can't say anything against it" BUT according to that logic you don't know that it would be a good thing either so why should we take your word over mine? also based on the debates that are around, i think it's fair to say that a lot of people do in fact care about winning debates on this site. 6- "especially if you could see the stats (but not the identity) of the people who voted for and against you. If the majority of the people voting don't have any stats at all then you might assume that they were just a bunch of bogus accounts. " ok first of all, if someone could see everyone's stats and just not their username, well that'd be pretty pointless because it would be very easy to figure out who was who. like, "ok well i know zerosmelt is against abortion and the death penalty but favors medical marijuana. .. " (just an example) so basically people would be able to figure out who was who based on analyzing the states of the voter. second, you can't assume that someone who chooses not to include their states (for reasons such as privacy amongst other things) are fake accounts. i've already expressed why people might not want to disclose this information. and how even if they did, it's not reliable. what if a lot of bogus accounts were created but it DID include this stat information? that would pretty much make your argument invalid. so anyway, in conclusion, i actually think that the less voters know about who they're judging, the better. there is so much bias on this site that knowing more about people can only make it worse. consider some nasty people (that certainly do exist on this site! ) down voting others specifically for their nationality, race, religious beliefs, political beliefs, etc. it's bad enough that this site allows for people to be exposed to others jobs and income brackets (which most people probably lie about anyway). having someone's entire background on display only INCREASES voting bias on this site, not DECREASE. and it only HINDERS open and honest debate, not promote.