Debate.org should maintain it's policy of deletion

Do we need Elitism in DDO? The fact that someone would only be on this site to have intelligent conversation shuts down the whole purpose of the site which is that it should be open to everyone regardless of someone’s intelligence, IQ, education or ability to articulate there points of view. For example there are those with the opinion that creationists are not intelligent because they push an opinion that intelligent design should be taught as a science in classrooms, there are some that would not see this as an intelligent conversation so the conversation should not be had. “We should prefer whichever system is most conducive to intelligent debate”. “Vote for whoever best upholds this model”. This is not a dichotomy of ‘Free debate’ vs ‘Intelligent debate’. The problem is that if we push for the idea of ‘intelligent debate’ which can clearly be open to interpretation brings up a few important questions such as: Who decides what an intelligent debate is? How would a system work where we could only have intelligent debates? How would you define an ‘intelligent’ debate? Can you restrict subjects, opinions and threads because they are not deemed intelligent? Would that also mean any threads relating to popular culture references, rap battles and anything similar to celebrity worship should be banned? Would there be two votes, one on what their opinion of the debate was and another to say who they agreed was? If the site judged every single debate on whether it was intelligent or not that would not only create a very elitist system where only the educated and veteran debaters could continue to be on the site. This site would put off new comers from debating on the site and harm the DDO business due to the restrictions from engaging with as many people as possible and not only those who have a skill for debate or can articulate there point the best. The removal of Spam isn't contradictary to 'Free Debate' In my very short time of being a member of DDO which would be just over 2 months now. I have not seen any examples of spam in the system in any opinions, forums or debates. This “caste fortune teller” which you mentioned might have only have been an isolated example and is simply a red herring which is only distracting from the real issue which is, does the site really have the right to take away people’s ability to freely debate as they wish without prejudice or censorship. My position still remains clear which is proposing the policy of ‘Free debate’ which I have clearly defined and stated earlier and since spam does not count as an opinion and cannot be found to have any characteristics of a debate. This policy would not cover Spam in any way, shape or form so the policy of ‘free debate’ is not a contradiction to the removal of spam and therefore still remains a distracting red herring. Brief statement on the Wylted debate While it’s correct that this Debate did start due to the Wylted’s controversial ‘rape battle’, all this shows is that DDO took the right step to keep the debate ongoing until the debate was finished. I have outlined a suggestion instead of making the ‘most popular’ reaching the front page have the ‘most liked’ reaching the front page to prevent this isolated, storm in a teacup happening in future. I have suggested in Round 1 a proposal to have a section for rather surreal threads, debates and opinions to be had. This proposal would ensure that threads, debates and opinions such as these left by one particular member of DDO would be part of the surreal section and leave constructive and important threads, debates and opinions to take place without these distracting threads. This debate was a clear example of what DDO is willing to tolerate in order to uphold the basic principle of the sight which is the right to debate anything debateable regardless of the debate being offensive, controversial or sensitive. DDO as a business should appeal to the widest audience DDO is a business and by not having extremely intolerable standards that would put of casual users. DDO should instead opt for a more relaxed and flexible structure then the current deletion policy which keeps to a very stringent system which is not helpful to their overall appeal to a new young vibrant market. The only thing that would be ‘unfair to the site, it’s members and anyone looking to join’ would be people looking to have a free debate about any subject without restrictions placed upon them from a minority of the membership who believes the debate they are having is offensive and want the site to enforce new rules just from them. This is called the ‘tyranny of the minority’ over the silent majority. If anyone wishes to start up their own unworkable debate site with rules restricting any debate because people may find them offensive then go ahead. No one is stopping you. The question of pornography What is your definition of pornography? A couple of months ago in Iran some women were arrested for showing off their arms and head in a music video described by some religious leaders as pornography. If this were the case that we should show cultural sensitivity to not offend those with this precise definition of pornography then Pro’s profile picture would be the first to go as this to some would be the quintessential example of pornography. You cannot sweep everyone with the same brush and we tolerate everyone’s opinions because we must accept that everyone is different and we should celebrate everyone’s different cultures, views and opinions because this is the platform of which DDO celebrates everyone’s differences. Peaceful Diversity is fine but it’s when restrictions harm that very idea that we should speak out. No one’s definitions or opinions is more important than anyone else’s so therefore should not take precedence one over the other. . http://www.telegraph.co.uk... The current system is unsustainable Pro concedes that “members being overwhemingly in favor of having the front page debates decided by "likes"” and concedes that “this would mitigate the impact of making the front page look bad”. This moderate suggestion would be popular, solve the dilemma of troll debates ending up on the front page and can be described in other words as a no brainer and a rational step forward. You cannot expect a few moderators to control the behaviour of about 200k members of DDO. This is impractical and like YouTube which cannot be expected to monitor all those members and the best way to not cause a flame war is to ‘not feed the troll’ and to ignore the behaviour of a few bad eggs. Time, Money and effort could be saved in the long term if juggle were to create an absurd or surreal debate section instead of wasting their time down an unsustainable and time consuming path like Pro’s suggests deleting every single offensive debate. The membership of DDO is rising according to Airmax and has done so at an astronomical rate. The system at the current rate will soon become unsustainable as there will be too many debates, threads and opinions to monitor and delete. The best path to deal with surreal debates is for incorporation not deletion for sustainable and practical reasons. Don’t feed the troll I do concur that flame wars do exist and can often be caused by trolls looking for an argument but what can be called bullying and harassment is usually ordinary members engaging in these type of discussions. Flame Wars are too common on YouTube and the best advice that can be given is the popular coined phrase of ‘Don’t feed the Troll’ if you ignore the troll they will get bored and go away. The best way to put out the Flame war is don’t fight fire with fire, flame wars are often short and by engaging with trolls you are really only bringing yourself down to their level. The best way of creating a friendly atmosphere for debating is by giving the membership the ability of debating anything debateable.