Facebook does more good than harm

Thanks for posting so soon! It's time for....... COUNTER REFUTATION AND RE-AFFIRMATION OF REBUTTALS!Rebuttal ReaffirmationMy first set of refutations were aimed around the fact that a minority of people experienced mental issues etc. etc. He refutes this by talking about a life-threatening drug. See the difference here? A media website that one billion people love, where sometimes they feel sad because others are living good lives, versus a very popular drug with a hidden side effect capable of killing thousands. This analogy is irrelevant.My opponent also said that a majority of users recieved some kind of stress out of their experience, however this is minute compared to the good that they can experience on facebook.My opponent argues my logic on how all the people on facebook think that it does more good than harm, however his refutation weak and confusing. Nobody is forced to be on facebook, so we can safely assume that most/all of the people on facebook want to be on facebook. You can deactivate your account if you want to, and if you think that something is doing more harm than good to you, anybody would stop doing that thing. Ergo, most/all of the 1,000,000,000 people on facebook think facebook does more good than harm.My opponent refutes my point about the logic of cyber bullying and who to blame by saying something about a lion. The truth remains: Bullyers are to blame for cyber bullying. If a normal bully insults someone, do we blame the language for providing a mode of them to insult him? Clearly not, because the langauge (facebook in this analogy) does so much good for us.My opponent refutes my point about how hard it is to create a proper registration system by failing to answer my question, which was, "What would you suggest?" There is no clear way to do that, so we can't persecute facebook for having a "laughably easy" regristration process.Counter RefutationsSorry about the broken source. The article talks about how getting likes increases self-esteem.My opponent said that many people will still be alive by the time facebook is done. First of all, he says facebook is on the decline and points to a source, but this source is merely pointing out a possible trend. There is no evidence that facebook will end soon, if ever. Secondly, even if some people are alive when facebook burns out (which I doubt it will), some people have still gotten to donate, so there is still a lot of good being done.My opponent says that I am giving a double standard with my point on starting movements, however he fails to recognize a necessary part in the logic process, what about facebook's interface makes this good thing happen. In your example of cyber bullying, it is not due to facebook but rather to the bullyer, because there is no fault in facebook's system that lets bullying happen. In the case of facebook starting movements, the fact that there is no proxy for facebook, the fact that facebook pages provide information so quickly, and the fact that pages can be created so quickly all point to facebook doing good.My opponent concedes on two points: connecting with friends and promoting businesses. ConclusionIn conclusion, some things to remember and then a weigh of the debate.If a knife cuts well, it is good, if it is blunt, it is bad, but if a robber stabs with a sharp knife, the robber is bad. Likewise, if facebook does good things, it is good, if it does bad things, it is bad, but if someone uses facebook to bully someone, the bullyer is bad. Also, remember blaming facebook for bullying is like blaming a language for insults. Since you join and leave facebook at free will, all of the members of facebook must think that it does more good than harm.The percentages my opponent has cited for anxiety etc. have all pointed to a amount lesser than 50% (except for one which I have refuted). Thusly, an opposite amount to a minority percentage is a majority percentage. Ergo, most people are fine with facebook.My opponent has conceded two of my arguments. So, let's weigh this debate.ProFacebook boosts self-esteemFacebook can be used for organ donation purposes->Most people will be alive when facebook goes away->That's still a lot of organs being donated.Facebook is a great way to connect with friends.Facebook can be used to start movements->Double standard->Clarification of logicFacebook promotes businessesCon Mental health->Low percentagesNo exercise/chair problems->People who won't exercise/get up out of their chair because of facebook are the kind of people who don't exercise and stay in their chair all dayCyber bullying->Flawed logicJustification of binge-eating->This could happen with anythingKids can cheat the system->No way around thisThis was a great debate! Thanks so much for accepting I had a blast and learned a lot :)