You shouldn't be allowed to vote for yourself in debates.

My idea of a fair debate is if you couldn't vote for yourself so it would be fair. Very well anyway, I accept your challenge. A)http://www.debate.org...... Kleptin (having a high win ratio) says no one should worry about their win ration: "Now, the lower your win ratio, the more evidence there is that you are hated/discriminated against. I find that amusing, so I sank myself down to 0 to make several points." This is more of HIS opinion over this. Do you believe that every loser with zero wins is hated? No, they just failed in winning the debate. Do you feel hated because you lost all your debates? Maybe, but its your feeling, not the rest of the losers. I lost all my debates too, do i feel hated? No, since i debate for fair winning and if i lost fair and squarely, I lost and will improve. But, 1 thing that strike me hard in the back is that you have clearly won the debate, yet your opponent has more points because he was voting for himself. For this reason, I'm against voting for yourself. B)People will make multiple accounts and vote for themselves albeit not for long but there will always be someone winning purely on this reason. Please note that even if we abolish the ability to vote for oneself people would still vote for oneself except with different accounts (http://www.debate.org...... one person having over ten accounts !). Sure, but to be able to vote, you need to verify yourself yes? Someone who has multiple accounts and registered as same number can easily be blocked if you just block the sole number from voting yourself. This goes with my idea of blocking the ability to vote for yourself. Also, multiple account comes with the risk of ban. My and your source: http://www.debate.org... c)People will down-vote other people that they don't like or don't agree with on the site and many people are frankly bias hence you'll lose even if you win the argument! Personal opinion exists in here, you are allowed to not agree with the winner. There are nearly 21000 people here in www.debate.org and the chance of losing because people doesn't like you is very small, unless you are hated by all 21000 persons which means you are a jerk. But, the winner is only decided by voters, not the debaters in this case which can be seen as fair. I mean look for example the President Selection. Everyone could vote for his/her president. Some vote by speech, some vote by appearance. My conclusion? Voting because of personal grudge or opinion is allowed in my opinion. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My Arguments ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. The ability of being able to vote for yourself is abused since it gives clear advantage over someone who can't vote for himself because he doesn't live around US. That was my only argument coming here :P And since you want at least 3 debates where a winner gets decided by voting for himself, sadly I can't do that for you. There are millions of debates here (well maybe lower) and you want me to find such a thing? Its the same as finding a needle in a forest. I await your answer