Members of this website should have to fulfill more requirements before they can start a debate

The rules state that I may not make any rebuttals until the next round. In response to this rule, my argument was prepared in advance of my opponent’s argument: Debates.org (DDO) is a great place for people to test their views and learn the art of debating. But like any organized website that relies on the participation of its members there is always be some issue regarding the conduct of those members. DDO offers forums and debates. Most people do not join a website such as this one just for the forums but even if one did, creating debates would likely not be an issue for that member. This leaves us with debates. There are only 3 means of participation in a debate; Voter, Challenger, or Instigator. Voter DDO correctly restricts the right of a member to vote on a debate until they have been involved in 3 debates. This protects the integrity of the vote by helping to ensure that a member is a “real person” and not a second account created just to vote a particular way, or a non-member who has no experience in debating and decides to vote simply because they agree with the resolution. Participants put a lot of time and effort into their arguments, and there is noting more important then protecting the integrity and quality of the votes that dictate the winner. Challenger If we restrict the rights of new members to vote then that only leaves us with a member participating by challenging or instigating a debate. Since the resolution states that a new member should not be allowed to immediately instigate a debate, this would be the only option left. The issue here is that it is fairly difficult to find a debate that a new member would have interest in, and disagree with the resolution. We would be asking new members to join a website, wait till someone issues a debate that meets their criteria, and then they would also have to be the first member who decides to accept. This would obviously deter many potentially valuable members from joining. Many members join because they have a few topics in mind that they wanted to debate. Forcing them to wait before issuing their challenge may cause them to lose interest and leave the site altogether. Instigator Being that the resolution states that new members should not be allowed to issue a challenge right away this is would not be allowed for them. However without them being allowed to vote, what would that do for those of us who have experience and wish for a strong and respectful debate? I think most members are very skeptical when being challenged by a new member because there is no telling if they will take the debate seriously, follow standard rules of conduct, or even finish the debate. But restricting their right to instigate will make this much more common. New members will wind up accepting any debate they can just to get debates under their belt and the community will suffer as a result. If a new member wants to gain experience or figure out if they really want to take this website seriously then they should do that on their own debates, not on everyone else’s. Conclusion: Restricting a new member’s right to instigate a debate may alleviate some problems, but will only create much bigger ones.